Talk:No, Thank You

Requested move 19 July 2023

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: no consensus. Participants were divided over whether the punctuation differences were sufficient to distinguish this article from other entries at No Thank You. Both arguments were predicated on WP:SMALLDETAILS and whether it was applicable here; divided interpretations of that policy prevented either side of the discussion from achieving consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:40, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

---

No, Thank You → No, Thank You (TV series) – This is not the primary topic over other entires at No Thank You; a comma is nowhere near sufficient disambiguation here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

• Weak support the TV series has 817 views but the novel has 337 and per WP:SMALLDETAILS we probably can't rely on the absence of the exclamation marks to distinguish. The album has more views (4,322)[[1]] but doesn't indicate its called with the comma but it would not be unreasonable to expect it here. This title was originally a redirect to the DAB created by the nom in 2016 until this article was created in 2021. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:57, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:DIFFPUNCT. This is the only page with this specific spelling, so should not carry parenthetical disambiguation. What is required instead is a hatnote to the disambiguation page, which I have added. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:37, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
• Support per WP:DIFFPUNCT, not consistent or distinctive. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:08, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. DIFFPUNCT gives Airplane! vs. Airplane as an example where italicization and an exclamation point are sufficient. The three exclamation point difference with No, Thank You!!! passes that bar in my opinion. I originally added the novel to the hatnote, but linking to the album makes more sense per popularity. ― Synpath 16:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

  SMALLDETAILS probably doesn't work for No, Thank You!!! as the !s are a variant of "No, Thank You" not the other way round. Airplane and Airplane! work because the former is the primary topic (primary over the film) and the film is the only topic that a reader typing "Airplane!" could be looking for. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:13, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Honestly, do the DIFFPUNCT citers really think this is helping Wikipedia navigation? Do they really expect people to know which titles use a comma and which do not? -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

How does this move improve navigation? This move would send everyone typing/clicking on the correct title in the search bar to a disambiguation page (I assume the proposal implicitly is to redirect the current title to No Thank You as a {{R from ambiguous term}}). I believe it's more likely than not that someone typing the comma intends to reach the content with this title, or at least would not be astonished to be brought there. For those users who seek something different, they should be sent to the disambiguation page via a hatnote, which is what DIFFPUNCT says, and DIFFPUNCT is policy. Ambiguity does not necessarily mean there should be parenthetical disambiguation; it's a last resort when two topics share the same the base name and other disambiguation methods are inappropriate (WP:NCDAB). "No, Thank You" is the best title for this article per WP:CRITERIA, and no other topic shares this exact base name, so no disambiguation in the title is required (i.e., WP:SMALLDETAILS aka DIFFPUNCT is a logical extension of WP:QUALIFIER) and hatnotes are used to address ambiguity with similar base names. In other words, it's the hatnote doing the disambiguation, not the comma. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:09, 25 July 2023 (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.