Talk:Freeheld
Add topicLatest comment: 10 years ago by Cuchullain in topic Requested move 27 June 2016
 | A fact from Freeheld appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 October 2014. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 27 June 2016
[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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Move. We have consensus that this is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC among WP:TWODABS. This was somewhat close, but I find the support arguments more persuasive in suggesting that the current setup is not efficient in serving readers. Cúchullain t/c 16:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Freeheld (2015 film) → Freeheld – Only uses of "Freeheld" are the two films, and page views over the last twelve months strongly favour the 2015 version. I appreciate that this might be considered recentism, but I think objectively a feature film with an A-list cast is always going to have broader appeal than a documentary short. PC78 (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2016 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 10:55, 5 July 2016 (UTC) --Relisting (2nd) Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:09, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose An Oscar-winning documentary that serves as the basis of the critically panned 2015 film has more long-term encyclopedic significance, so there is no primary topic. Let the views settle a bit too - they likely look more impressive because the film recently came out. Nohomersryan (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- An award win, even if it is an Oscar, is a fairly week argument for long term significance. Critical reception has no bearing on notability. PC78 (talk) 17:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Freeheld should be the disambig page for both articles. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 13:33, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support WP:TWODABS situation, agree with nom that feature films are more appealing than documentaries. Timmyshin (talk) 17:14, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- Support the current setup isn't working when more people view the disambiguation page than the other article. SSTflyer 07:01, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support per SSTflyer - a much better solution for our readers. Dohn joe (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose leave dab at base 2601:541:4305:C70:3180:10E7:2042:B06F (talk) 17:45, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Support. The 2007 film gets 60 views a day while the 2015 film gets 908 views a day. We must base our decision on current stats and not anticipate the future, per WP:CRYSTALBALL. The disambiguation page gets 38 views a day, or 4 percent of traffic. If disambiguation is done properly, this figure should be under 2 percent. Gulangyu (talk) 14:05, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.