Talk:420

Har-dee-har, lads (Re: Graphitti)

... I'm removing the Met police arrest spoofery in the intro. Yes, I am a nerd. Oisinoc (talk) 17:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 6 September 2019

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 as proposed -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:36, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

---

• 420 (disambiguation) → 420
• 420 → AD 420

– There is no clear primary topic over 420 (number) and 420 (cannabis culture). The year article has 971 views (while 419 only has 226 and 421 has 349) but 420 (cannabis culture) has 31,855 (over 38x but less PT#2), 420 (dinghy) has 2,476 (more but possibly less PT#2), the number has 426 (but probably has a stronger claim for PT#2)[[1]]. A Google search for 420 returns only the cannabis topic, a Google Image similarly returns only the cannabis topic. A Google Book search isn't clear but it doesn't appear to show anything for the year. A site:wikipedia.org 420 returns the cannabis topic, then the DAB page then the year. In terms of editors the cannabis topic has 10 edits and 417 watchers compared with only 2 and 42 for the year so its clear that editors to likely don't want the year. In conclusion its clear that the year isn't primary by PT#1 and the number has a better claim for PT#2. There is a RFC at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RfC about articles on three digit numbers but that seems to have gone a bit quiet and has been open nearly a month. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:56, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support 420 (cannabis culture) move to primary, per page views and cultural significance. Historically, the numerals identification with its subject, and the notability of the established 420 holiday, are likely not to diminish but to grow. So from the current trend lines, as shown in the nomination, the topic seems to fall outside the Wikipedia concept and definition of recentism, and primary would then be established by page views and sourced references. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:49, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
• Support 420 (cannabis culture) move to primary The pageview lead is so enormous that it's hard to countenance not making 420 (cannabis culture) the ptopic. Also, keep in mind, the pageview stats for the year are inflated because it's currently the primary topic, and receives a lot of false-positive hits from readers searching for other meanings. Comparing 420 to the three preceding and following years, we can infer that around 80% of its views are readers trying to get somewhere else. So 420 (cannabis culture) doesn't just have ~33x as many views as the year - it would be more accurate to say it has 165x the views. If you take a longer view over the span of years (which takes into account periodic April traffic spikes), it's more like 313x. Overall, it gets around 96-97% of all views among topics named "420". Compared to a lot of pop culture topics that come through here (songs, albums, TV episodes) this article even has a relatively strong claim to long-term significance - it's maintained relevance for decades. As a second choice, I would support WP:NOPRIMARY over the status quo, but I think it's a far worse option. Colin M (talk) 15:06, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
• Support 420 (cannabis culture) move to primary Rreagan007 (talk) 18:56, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
• Support AS PROPOSED (strongly). However, neutral (maybe weak oppose) on moving 420 (cannabis culture) to primary for now. Like, while the weed number is prominent, we can evaluate later (whether the weed number is more prominent than every other meaning combined?). For now, it would be SAFEST to move the DISAMBIGUATION page to the basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 20:05, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Pinging participants of previous similar discussiosn: @Ceyockey, JFG, Steel1943, No Great Shaker, Certes, Red Slash, Arthur Rubin, Amakuru, Carn, Gonnym, Interstellarity, Netoholic, Hansen Sebastian, Narky Blert, Shhhnotsoloud, Bkonrad, King of Hearts, JHunterJ, CookieMonster755, Dicklyon, and Power~enwiki:. Crouch, Swale and Randy Kryn and Colin M and Rreagan007 have already weighed in. Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support – Page views alone do not a primary topic make: there is enough long-term significance too for the number, the year, and the sailboat series. A dab page is best. — JFG ^talk 21:38, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• Make 420 a DAB page (i.e. support). The question here is, simply put: is or is not 420 AD the WP:PTOPIC for 420? I say no; there are at least three other important meanings.

Double moves, as suggested by some contributors above, should be avoided. Such an RM should be taken one step at a time, so that there are only two options in each RM. The discussion at Talk:1000#Requested move 30 August 2019 addressed the second stage of a similar compound discussion.

I have an opinion as to whether there is or is not a PTOPIC for 420, but I am not going to take this discussion off-topic by arguing it here. Narky Blert (talk) 21:55, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support AS PROPOSED. I oppose moving 420 (cannabis culture) to 420 since there is not enough evidence to prove it to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. That, and the use of "4/20" as a date would be specific to parts of the world that use a "month/day" format when probably most use a "day/month" format. Also, on a related note, this move request would possibly also affect the pages 4/20 (currently a disambiguation page), 4:20 (currently a redirect towards 420 (cannabis culture), and 4-20 (also a redirect towards 420 (cannabis culture)). Steel1943 (talk) 21:59, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Steel1943 has raised important secondary issues, which can only be - and which very much should be! - addressed once this RM has been resolved: what to do with 4/20, 4:20 and 4-20? Variants like that are generally redirected to the unpunctuated number as {{R from modification}}. WP:DIFFPUNCT is not a good way to ensure that readers get to what they're looking for. Narky Blert (talk) 22:09, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

9/11 (disambiguation) was merged; see Talk:911. Of course, different considerations may apply to variants of 420. Certes (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support as proposed. Oppose moving the cannabis-culture page to primary, per above. That's a niche meaning, which while popular in North America and amongst certain sections of society, does not hold the broad long-term significance that the number and the year enjoy. Overall there isn't a primary topic here.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:06, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• Support as proposed. Oppose cannabis as a term primarily known throughout the first world only. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• Support as proposed. Putting the dab at the base name is an improvement because the year is clearly not a primary topic. It seems marginal whether the cannabis term is a primary topic today but its prominence may not stand the test of time. Certes (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• Seems to be Snow for move to DAB, and suggestions to take up primary separately. Would suggest that the first move be made per snow, and if an RM for primary starts then pings to participating editors and relevant Wikiprojects. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:14, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
• Support as proposed – no primarytopic. The idea that the cannabis topic is primary for a three-digit number sounds like someone's been smoking it. Dicklyon (talk) 04:59, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Don't need to smoke it to recognize page views as primary criteria (although...). Long term significance comes from the stand-alone number being closely co-identified with a topic and a prominent unofficial holiday, something that can't be said of any other number. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:58, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

    Not exactly long term. And note that a number with special significance like 911 is going to give a clue in usage stats, as here. There's no such effect for 420. Dicklyon (talk) 15:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

    911 is closely identified with two significant topics and not one. Although 420 (dinghy) dings up past 120 views on a good day, the cannabis culture number and holiday seems the most prominent and in a position of uniqueness (thus a common sense exception). Commenters are correct, however, in saying that the connection between the number and the page is not as yet seen to be either universal or on-average commonly used, so maybe I'm looking at wp:crystal (with a little help from my friends) and, if the suggested page move to primary does not receive consensus before then, it can be successfully revisted in a few years. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:47, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

    I'm not saying 911 should have a primarytopic, just that it's a good example of how the special use of a number might be reflected in sources. There's nothing like that for the cannabis use of 420, which is really pretty obscure by comparison. Making primarytopic grabs on numbers is the road to chaos, in my opinion. We need some stability convention to present that, like was have with WP:USPLACE which has been enormously stabilizing as a way to shut down all the frequent primarytopic takeover efforts. Dicklyon (talk) 16:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

    Yes assuming this is moved as proposed (which I can't see why not) we can then later see if the cannabis topic is primary (unless we make it primary straight away). Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:57, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

• Proposal There has to be wider disscusion, what to do with numbers/years - "419" and most are just articles with redirects from "AD 419". It seems to me that it’s better to do the opposite. "AD ⁿⁿⁿ" would always be year. And 420 should be disambiguation page.·Carn !? 08:05, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

That wider discussion is already underway at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#RfC about articles on three digit numbers. Narky Blert (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2019 (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.