Talk:Two-Way Stretch

Porridge

I had it in mind, and I can't remember from where, that this film was profoundly influential on the much later Ronnie Barker TV series Porridge. Can anyone confirm? Sam Blacketer 21:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 5 July 2026

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 02:02, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

---

Two-Way Stretch → Two Way Stretch (1960 film) – There are currently three pages with almost no difference in title, and without a disambiguation page to distinguish them:

• Two-way stretch, a redirect to Stretch fabric.
• Two-Way Stretch, this 1960 film.
• Two way stretch, a redirect to the film page.

For the film, I think the title which should be used in WP should be Two Way Stretch, without the hyphen. WP:COMMONNAME says that articles should be titled with "the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources)". Here are some sources for the two alternatives:

Two Way Stretch (my preferred spelling):

• BFI record
• BBFC certification record
• Film's on-screen opening credits
• Leslie Halliwell Halliwell's Film Guide

Two-Way Stretch (the current title):

• The original poster, shown in the infobox. However, this also uses all lower case, and film advertising posters are often unreliable records of titles
• EIDR content record
• Kine Weekly p. 9 in-article reference
• Ephraim Katz The Film Encyclopedia

A Google Books search here shows a roughly even split.

I think the clinchers here should be the BFI and BBFC records, supported by the film's own credits.

So, I suggest moving the current page to be titled Two Way Stretch (1960 film), and deleting the Two way Stretch redirect to it. Masato.harada (talk) 16:01, 5 July 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. 1isall (talk | contribs) 21:35, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose, unnecessary disambiguation. Retarget Two-way stretch to the film, which is the primary topic. Usage of the hyphen is mixed, I'm not seeing enough evidence to move away from the stable title. 162 etc. (talk) 17:05, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Comment: The proposed title should be Two Way Stretch (film) (assuming the claim about the hyphen is correct) since "1960" is unnecessary since there are no other film articles to disambiguate against. (I have no opinion other wise on this move request.) Also, we don't delete redirects via move requests ... that's what WP:RFD is for Steel1943 (talk) 02:07, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

• Keep where it is (although it has a little bit of a MOS:HYPHENCAPS problem, which MOS:5 mitigates by saying "this rule is often ignored in titles of works") or move to Two Way StretchTwo Way Stretch (which has redirected to this topic since 2006). I personally prefer leaving it where it is, since that seems more grammatically natural and is supported by various sources as mentioned above. This seems to be the primary topic for the title case title, with or without a hyphen. I see no need to add "(1960 film)" or even "(film)". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 07:41, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Do we keep it as is or remove the hyphen? 1isall (talk | contribs) 21:35, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose as proposed, but would support Two-Way Stretch → Two Way Stretch per evidence presented in the nomination. It would be indeed more intuitive for Two-Way Stretch to serve as a redirect to Two Way Stretch, rather than Two Way Stretch redirecting, as it has done for 20 years, to Two-Way Stretch. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:18, 13 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose. Redirect all variations here. A hatnote is sufficient to point to the fabric. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:23, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

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.