Talk:G.D.F.R.

About chart entries

Chart entries for Swedish and Australian charts have no relevant sources. How one could trust those rankings given by some wikipedians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutaassıp (talk • contribs) 03:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Udonis Haslem was featured too on music video

Ok guys. But you know it, the Miami Heat's power forward and center Udonis Haslem was featured too. i decided to edit that article, but sorry guys. oh i forgot, i decided to edited Haishen's dissipation later, as courtesy of NOAA, Haishen's dissipation must be on April 7. thanks guys and good morning. - User:Nino Marakot talk 10:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 17 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 18:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

G.D.F.R. (song) → G.D.F.R. – I don't think anyone is going to search for the format (which didn't even have an article until March) with full stops. And we could also just redirect GDFR here and put a hatnote at the top. Unreal7 (talk) 17:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

• Comment so you'll collapse the disambiguation page into a hatnote for the song? -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment if the disambiguation page is not collapsed into a hatnote onto the song article ( or moved to "GFDR (disambiguation)" ), then I Oppose the move, since the disambiguation page would occupy the base location, and the format suggested at the target is a common English grammatical variant of that (and used as such by the song itself) -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose the format is the main topic. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Release

The release date is very different in the article. In the text stands August and in the right section stands October. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.174.240.139 (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 25 July 2017

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:  Not done (page mover closure) as Anthony Appleyard says, it could be ephemeral. Wait a bit, if the page view stats are the same, re-nominate. DrStrauss talk 19:59, 2 August 2017 (UTC) DrStrauss talk 19:59, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

---

G.D.F.R. (song) → G.D.F.R. – I want to reopen this move because it seems as if there are not many subtopics on the dab page, which I personally think should be deleted. I added a hatnote for Global Digital Format Registry, the other article on the dab page, which also does not seem to get much attention. Bottom line is, when people are looking up G.D.F.R., 95% of the time they are looking up this song. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:3DCB:4C8:3F44:C58C (talk) 16:33, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose it's a song. and in books GDFR is three other things In ictu oculi (talk) 07:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. Most pop music is ephemeral, and the other meanings likeliest will remain much longer. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 19:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
• Support. This is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in a WP:TWODABS situation. It receives *99%* of the page views of the only other topic, which is not titled GDFR, but Global Digital Format Registry.[1] The dab page isn't even necessary; just redirect to the song (often known without the periods in sources[2][3]) and add a hat note for the other article.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Unreal7 (talk) 13:55, 2 August 2017 (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.

Requested move 28 December 2021

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 rough consensus in the discussion is that there are no issues with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC due to the GDFR disambiguation remaining unchanged, and therefore that main point of contention regarding the requested move is considered moot. Therefore, the request is granted as being uncontroversial. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 05:43, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

---

G.D.F.R. (song) → G.D.F.R. – Last discussed in 2017. This song gets an overwhelming majority of the pageviews[4], and Global Digital Format Registry is a two-sentence stub. The primary topic is clear, and disambiguation would be best resolved by hatnotes, per WP:ONEOTHER. 162 etc. (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 23:12, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. In this case of a two-entry disambiguation page, with one entry carrying 70 detailed inline cites and delineating a song described as "a sleeper hit", and the other entry being a two-sentence stub with three inline cites, it would seem that GDFR redirecting to G.D.F.R. and a hatnote atop the song's entry pointing to Global Digital Format Registry would be the more-intuitive means of resolving this matter. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:41, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. What has changed? "GDFR is" test in books still overwhelmingly refers to GDFR not this song In ictu oculi (talk) 13:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

• But this proposal is not to move the song to GDFR; it is to move it to G.D.F.R., with dots. Would anybody bother inserting dots when abbreviating the name of the (defunct) data format registry? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:05, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support It seems that the "GDFR" got merged into the "UDFR" anyway, making it defunct and not nearly as primary of a topic, if it should even be an article at all. The song is the clear primary topic here._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support As the primary topic and the clear common sense solution to get readers to what they are looking for. In terms of usage and reader interest the gap is vast. While there is certainly a bias against pop culture subjects, the assumption that a now deprecated registry system, which has been a stub for years, is inherently more notable needs some sort of backup. --Yaksar (let's chat) 21:43, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. The Global Digital Format Registry is of far more long-term significance, so there is no primary topic. Andrewa (talk) 00:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
• Comment. A compromise might consist of a retention of the disambiguation page and merely the deletion of the parenthetical qualifier "(song)".

Currently, the GDFR disambiguation page depicts:

GDFR may refer to:

• Global Digital Format Registry, in digital preservation
• "G.D.F.R." (song), a 2014 song by Flo Rida

and, in the event the proposed compromise gains consensus, it would depict:

GDFR may refer to:

• Global Digital Format Registry, in digital preservation
• "G.D.F.R.", a 2014 song by Flo Rida

Thus, no primary topic is created and no need for "(song)". Users searching for the registry (and thinking that it might have an acronym) are far more likely to type GDFR, rather than the punctuation in G.D.F.R. but, in case anyone does type the dots, a hatnote atop the song's entry would resolve any misunderstanding. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support: The proposal is to move the song to G.D.F.R., with dots. It is not a proposal to move it to GDFR. I doubt anyone would bother inserting dots when abbreviating the name of the (defunct) data format registry – that is just not the typical way of abbreviating things in modern usage, and it's also much more difficult to type than GDFR. I tried searching some of the above suggested sources (e.g., books) for "G.D.F.R." (with dots) and found nothing (if I insist the result must have the dots in it). GDFR is not affected by this RM and can remain a disambiguation page. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:41, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
• Comment While my original nomination proposed a WP:ONEOTHER disambiguation, I support the proposal to keep the GDFR disambiguation page as suggested above. 162 etc. (talk) 06:04, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Getting relisted twice means failed. But given the meaning in print books, a dab page is fine. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

That is certainly not what getting relisted means, particular for a discussions where general consensus seems to be favoring a support. But that aside, I wouldn't necessarily prefer it but certainly would not oppose the proposed solution as better than the current status.--Yaksar (let's chat) 19:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support. The song is the primary topic, both for "G.D.F.R." and for "GDFR" (sources render it both ways). The difference in page views is clear, while Global Digital Format Registry is not of greater long-term significance. Adumbrativus (talk) 03:40, 21 January 2022 (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.