Talk:Run for Your Life (Beatles song)

Untitled

Removed a bit stating that George's songs were credited as Lennon/McCartney. George's songs were always his from the start... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.183.195.254 (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I removed a bit at the beginning of the article stating that all songs were written by John Lennon or Paul McCartney, because it is inaccurate. George Harrison wrote some songs, too. DAK4Blizzard (talk) 08:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I love this song. Even though it's evil. BillMasen (talk) 00:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Alternate takes

None. Danny dasher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.157.76.65 (talk) 09:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Cover Versions

A user has brought up that maybe cover versions should not be included in the article. I think we should have a discussion whether or not the content should be removed before anything is actually removed from the page. Housewatcher (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 12 December 2016

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: Moved (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 11:42, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

---

• Run for Your Life → Run for Your Life (Beatles song)
• Run for Your Life (disambiguation) → Run for Your Life

– Fails both parts of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The album track Lennon designated as his "least favourite Beatles song" only gets 81 of 227 average daily views of all the Run for Your Life topics. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The pageview chart is slightly misleading in that it contains an outlying one-day spike, but even a corrected one shows that the current page gets around 36% of the views. Falls short of the bar. Dohn joe (talk) 17:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - It does not fail WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. None of the other possibilities is as notable. And what Lennon thought of the song is irrelevant to how well-known the topic is or how Wikipedia should handle it. It's not about Lennon's preferences; it's about the topic. As for number of views, as Mark Twain said, there are "lies, damned lies, and statistics". Let's look at it from a different angle: the article is 48% higher than each of the next two highest ones. Sundayclose (talk) 17:36, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

  Well, the guideline says that a primarytopic by usage requires being sought after much more than the next most popular article (which it does, as you point out), and also more than the other topics combined. That's where this one falters - it only gets about 30-40%. Dohn joe (talk) 17:53, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a guideline, not a policy. That generally makes this a matter of opinion. Otherwise there would be no point in this discussion. Sundayclose (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Generally these discussions focus on applying the guideline, not challenging it. The purpose of the guideline is stated in the header:

And then:

(A) "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined —to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term.

(B) "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term.

In ictu oculi (talk) 19:06, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand all of that. I can read. I'm not "challenging" the guideline in general. But sometimes the issue is worth discussing and getting consensus. Otherwise we would simply calculate the page views and make a decision without discussion. Sundayclose (talk) 19:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

• Support as per nom, also a google search doesn't even show the beatles song on the first page - that that by itself it means all that much, but cumulatively, it adds circumstantial evidence that it isn't that PRIMARY. Tiggerjay (talk) 01:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I should point out, however, that Google searches generally don't support much of anything on Wikipedia. It all depends on how you search. For example, look at this Google search where we specify that it is some form of entertainment (song, film, novel, or album) since those are the kinds of articles that are viewed the most for "run for your life" on Wikipedia: [1]. Voila, it's on the first page. Now, you may be thinking I stacked the deck in favor of the song. But if you search without those specifiers (simply "run for your life"), few if any of the items related to the most viewed Wikipedia pages (song, film, novel, album) show up. My point is not to say that a Google search supports the popularity of the song, but to say that a Google search doesn't support much of anything. As I pointed out in my first post here, statistics can be misleading. Sundayclose (talk) 02:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. The disambiguation page contains at least 30 entries of which at least 10 have individual articles. When confronted with such a considerable number, the primary topic bar rises to a degree of considerable height. With all due respect to the notability of Beatles songs, this title does not appear to meet the challenge. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 06:32, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
• Support. The evidence shows that the Beatles song receives only a minority of the page views, meaning it's not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in terms of what the readers are seeking.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:48, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
• Support - "Inherent notability" no longer applies. The Beatles may be notable, but the song by the band is probably less popular than the TV series or the 2014 film. --George Ho (talk) 20:29, 15 December 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.