Talk:Nightcaps, New Zealand

Requested move 1 July 2020

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 (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

---

Nightcaps → Nightcaps, New Zealand – Per WP:ASTONISH and WP:PLURALPT Nightcap (drink) gets 3,371 views, Nightcap (garment) gets 2,828, The Nightcaps (Texas band) gets 114, The Nightcaps (Seattle band) gets 30 while the place in NZ only gets 90, the title should redirect to the singular base name (Nightcap) per WP:DABCOMBINE. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 18:16, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

• As seen by several similar recent discussions, these moves are definitely not uncontroversial. Station1 (talk) 18:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Do you honestly think a town of 294 people is the primary topic for such a generic name? Some of the other cases have been where users have incorrectly overwritten redirects. And none of the other cases are as clear cut (at least those that you have participated in). Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
    • As mentioned elsewhere, primary topic is irrelevant (with rare exceptions) when there is only one article on WP that needs a particular title. The hatnote is appropriate and sufficient. Nightcaps is the appropriate title for this article per WP:NCNZ. There is no conflict with another title and no problem. Therefore, oppose an unnecessary move. Station1 (talk) 18:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
      • Nope, per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT "The title of the primary topic article may be different from the ambiguous term. This may happen when the topic is primary for more than one term, when the article covers a wider topical scope, or when it is titled differently according to the naming conventions." "The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary". There are numerous topics that are ambiguous with multiple titles. The hatnote is not sufficient, someone typing the term should be able to choose the article they want rather that us presupposing they want a topic simply because its the only topic that by our NC could be actually located at this title. Per WP:NCNZ "Nightcaps, New Zealand" is the correct title when disambiguation is needed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
        • I think we should presuppose that most people who type "Nightcaps" actually want the topic Nightcaps, and not some other topic with some other title. Station1 (talk) 20:07, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
          • But the drink and garment are also called "Nightcaps" and therefore are competitors for this title per WP:PLURALPT. There is an island in Scotland called both "Isle of Arran" and simply "Arran" by different sources so both names are valid no matter what title we give the island article. There is also Arran, Saskatchewan a village in Canada which is only called "Arran". Both the island and village are title matches for "Arran" but only the island is for "Isle of Arran". In some cases the presence or absence of an "s" might distinguish, such as Blue (colour) and Blues (genre) and Orange (DAB) and Oranges (fruit) because colours are usually uncountable (while the fruit is) but Purples does go to the colour because there is no other title match for the term. Note that on Commons, Commons:Category:Nightcaps (headgear) does use the plural title since categories generally use plurals while articles use singular but that doesn't mean singular named topics can claim only title of them either. If the drink and garment were usually uncountable then you might be able to argue no title conflict but even ignoring the band its unlikely a 294 place be at the base name then. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:24, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom and discussion. Plurals of common words should usually redirect to their singular page or to a disamb. page, and the nominator proves the case via rendition of page views. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:46, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
• Support but move the base page into singular or a disambiguation page because it is clear not primary topic. DAB page until now not yet created. 114.125.229.195 (talk) 03:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
• Support per policy arguments put forward in discussion. Schwede66 16:09, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
• Support per policy, common sense and "nightcaps are" vs "nightcaps is" in GBooks. As for several similar recent discussions, these moves are uncontroversial except for one editor who refuses to understand title policy. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:34, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Nightcaps most often refers to town. 122.60.80.64 (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

  Evidence please? I doubt it does even to most people in NZ. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Clearly not the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:35, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Despite whatever other meanings "nightcap" may have, the town is clearly the primary topic for the term "Nightcaps". A hatnote can refer users to the "nightcap" page. Disambiguation is a necessary evil not a desired feature and its use should be limited wherever possible - the naming mess of WP:USPLACE is something to be avoided, not emulated. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 23:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  • How can this tiny, insignificant town possibly be a primary topic for anything? -- Necrothesp (talk) 00:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
  • See the page views above and the fact that both of the generic meanings have a plural form (WP:PLURALPT and WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT). Yes we shouldn't be disambiguating when unnecessary but it is needed in this case so this isn't applying USPLACE. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:33, 8 July 2020 (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.