Talk:Slowly Slowly (band)

Requested move 27 September 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: Song moved, band not moved  — Amakuru (talk) 11:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

---

• Slowly Slowly (band) → Slowly Slowly
• Slowly Slowly → Slowly Slowly (song)

– I believe the band is incredibly likely to be the primary topic above all others. The title currently holding the base name is little more than a stub (which doesn't seem to be changing any time soon), whilst the other entry is essentially a partial title match. Interested to hear others' thoughts. Sean Stephens (talk) 23:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. Pageviews fail to show a predominance of interest for the band. The song articles have gotten more views than the band article. Move Slowly Slowly to Slowly Slowly (Guru Randhawa song) and move Slowly, Slowly to Slowly, Slowly (Magnapop song) to disambiguate the songs. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Support these suggestions.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:35, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Your reasoning is fair enough, but moving the song to Slowly Slowly (Guru Randhawa song) is unnecessary disambiguation. See also my response below to Crouch, Swale below. Sean Stephens (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
• Support 2nd, Neutral 1st — but fully Support BarrelProof's suggestions, per above. No primary topic for either title, with or without the comma. The safest bet would be to have a disambiguation page at the basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 16:36, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
• Support 2nd, oppose 1st, the band gets 283 views compared with 234 for the song and 21 for "Slowly, Slowly". I'd consider supporting BarrelProof's alternative suggestion for the Guru Randhawa song but not the Magnapop one since per WP:SMALLDETAILS the addition of the comma is likely distinct but the lack of it not unless the Guru Randhawa song is sometimes written with a comma. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • I agree with this; a hatnote from the Guru Randhawa to the Magnapop one is more than enough to distinguish the two. Sean Stephens (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
    • Especially when the subject is a song, I think the presence or absence of a comma is not sufficient to distinguish between the topics. Punctuation marks are not apparent when speaking or singing, and exact punctuation is difficulty to remember, so people looking for a topic are unlikely to know whether to insert a punctuation mark or not. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose I dont know, on what basis did the proposer, proposed this. but i have this to support by vote.SonalMehta06 (talk) 10:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Well, the song featuring Pitbull is a stub and was sent to AFD (with no consensus emerging), so could probably be converted to a redirect, and the other entry uses a comma, so realistically should be located in a "see also" section instead. This leaves the band, which would almost certainly be primary over them both. Sean Stephens (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
    • Regardless of whether you think there should be an article about it or not, the number of readers who want to read the article about the Guru Randhawa song seems to be about the same as the number of readers who want to read the article about the band, so we have WP:NOPRIMARY topic. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  • You're link shows similar views for both, did you mean to only oppose 1st? Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:48, 29 September 2021 (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.