Talk:Cycle (album)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Jazz

	Jazz portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 4 August 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. The supporters have strong arguments rooted in WP:ALBUMDAB (and the associated RfC) and WP:SMALLDETAILS that this page belongs at Cycle (album). The opposers don't really seek to rebut those arguments by explaining why those policies and guidelines don't apply (or why this is the rare case where IAR should be deployed)—instead, what we have is mostly objections that these policies and guidelines result in ambiguity. Now, I understand those arguments (taking my closer hat off for a minute, I actually agree with some of them), but WP:RMCI and WP:DETCON require me to close in line with global consensus, and the supporters have shown that global consensus favors a move. If that global consensus is wrong, the proper solution is to change the rules rather than ignore them on a case-by-case basis (see the flowchart)—if such an effort is successful and the policies and guidelines are in fact changed, feel free to renominate at that point. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cycle (Paul Horn album) → Cycle (album) – WP:ALBUMDAB. User:No such user and User:Robertsky seem to disagree. I don't care what the guideline is. I don't care what guideline turns into in the future. But, two people have denied a move that is clearly substantiated by WP:ALBUMDAB, so if we need to open this discussion again, then User:No such user and User:Robertsky, now's your chance to do that. Tree Critter (talk) 01:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 14:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:32, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support, yes it's the only album with the name so should be disambiguated with (album) as per WP:ALBUMDAB. But pageview stats are so low for this specific, that I'm not unopposed to keeping as is either.--Ortizesp (talk) 04:21, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't care what the guideline is either, but the proposed renaming would violate the basic principle of WP:Disambiguation: Ensuring that a reader who searches for a topic using a particular term can get to the information on that topic quickly and easily, whichever of the possible topics it might be. And removing the author's name from this (barely notable) 1965 album certainly does not help to distinguish it from Cycles (Cartel album) and Cycles (David Darling album) and Cycles (The Doobie Brothers album) and Cycles (Frank Sinatra album) and Cycles (Redbone album), as well as Cycle (Merzbow album) and Cycle (Buckethead album) that do not have articles. Don't fix if ain't broken. No such user (talk) 07:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support there may be confusion but unless others in the plural are also known in the singular this is the only notable album in the singular. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:32, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't see any reason to deviate from WP:ALBUMDAB here. The singular vs. plural is enough of a WP:SMALLDETAIL to distinguish from the others. 162 etc. (talk) 13:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - adds ambiguity for no benefit. There are too many other close matches. WP:Disambiguation "refers to more than one subject covered by Wikipedia, either as the main topic of an article, or as a subtopic covered by an article", so can be an issue even if other albums are only coverd on artist or discography pages. The plural is not enough of a WP:SMALLDETAIL to make it easy for readers or editors to distinguish. -- Netoholic @ 01:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really buying that. Do we need to move The Animal to The Animal (film) because The Animals exist? How about Blues - does it need to be moved to Blues (music) because of the colour Blue? Sticking to song and album titles, the precedent is well-established - Color (album) is not additionally disambiguated despite the existence of albums named "Colors", ditto for Chains (album) and other albums named "Chain"; Daughter (song), Daughters (John Mayer song) and Daughters (Nas song) coexist just fine. 162 etc. (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to get into a back and forth with us cherry-picking examples and counter-examples of current usage. My vote is how I think we should handle this. -- Netoholic @ 16:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for rising the Color example which illustrates how ill-conceived and rushed the whole SONGDAB "rule" is. <sarcasm>It is, of course, blindingly obvious to the readers that Color (album) was made by NEWS, while we have to explicitly specify who has made Colour (Andy Hunter album) and Colour (The Christians album).</sarcasm> No such user (talk) 17:13, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say the problem is less with SONGDAB and more with WP:SMALLDETAILS, which is policy. I argued on the other side of this at Talk:Catalog (album) last year, where it was successfully argued that the title sufficiently disambiguated with albums named "Catalogue". 162 etc. (talk) 18:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Don't add ambiguity, possibly confusing the reader with reference to similarly named albums such as Cycles (Frank Sinatra album) (one of six Cycles album titles) and two Cycle albums, one by Merzbow and the other by Buckethead. Binksternet (talk) 02:50, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, easy for readers to confuse the various pages. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:24, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose give readers a break In ictu oculi (talk) 16:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALBUMDAB and the associated RFC are crystal clear, and nothing in the Opposer's comments above (which are primarily evidence free assertions of reader confusion) justifies an IAR exception. Singular vs plural is regularly used to disambiguate article titles, and there's no reason not to apply that same principle here. Iffy★Chat -- 17:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:ALBUMDAB due to the fact that it was established by an RFC, so it's existence should overtake and opposes against this establish titling consistency. Steel1943 (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:ALBUMDAB. The opposing argument could just as easily apply to numerous other articles and, accordingly, can't be taken to be simply a rare WP:IAR exception to the established guideline. If there is a desire to change our guidelines (WP:ALBUMDAB, WP:SMALLDETAILS, or WP:AT), that can be explored at the appropriate venue, but, per WP:CONLEVEL, we shouldn't attempt to use a local consensus to override a well-established central (or "global", to use ArbCom's term) consensus. Graham (talk) 05:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.