 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Redirect
editConsider page view statistics. In the last 30 days, the article on the book by Archimedes has 890 views, the article on the 2005 film has 882 views, and the article on the Killing Time album has 97 views. By contrast the article on Method acting has almost 35,000 views. Clearly that is the primary meaning of "The Method". The other choices for "The Method" to point to are almost completely insignificant, and only the Stanislavski technique is universally known as "The Method". Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- Your reasoning is dubious as the term "The Method" does not actually sayviews anything about ACTING. Tkuvho (talk) 15:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
- First of all, Tkuvho already said, but I repeat: had Method acting even a million views, this would indicate absolutely nothing about majority of use of just two words: "The Method". Second, as Beyond My Ken stated himself, "The Method refers to The Method of Constantin Stanislavski", which is obviously nothing but Stanislavski's system, an article different from Method acting. So, is a dab required or just redirect to one randomly picked of two articles? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:05, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
- I just became aware of the page Method (disambiguation). Since the definite article is not used in Method acting, I would suggest deleting the link to that page here. It is listed more appropriately at Method (disambiguation). Tkuvho (talk) 16:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
- First of all, Tkuvho already said, but I repeat: had Method acting even a million views, this would indicate absolutely nothing about majority of use of just two words: "The Method". Second, as Beyond My Ken stated himself, "The Method refers to The Method of Constantin Stanislavski", which is obviously nothing but Stanislavski's system, an article different from Method acting. So, is a dab required or just redirect to one randomly picked of two articles? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:05, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
"Almost completely insignificant"? So if I show that some airhead actress who is currently getting a lot of attention in some ephemeral TV series gets more attention during the past few months on the internet, especially when she poses in a bikini, than Plato or Albert Einstein gets, then the latter two people are almost completely insignificant? Michael Hardy (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with User:Michael Hardy. Furthermore, User:Beyond My Ken has not substantiated his claim that the Stanislavski technique is universally known as "The Method". If such a claim is sourced, we can restore the link to method acting. Tkuvho (talk) 17:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
I had thought of saying that if Homer Simpson gets far more searches than Homer, who wrote the Oddysey, then the former is the predominant usage and the latter is "almost insignificant". But a weakness in that example is that they actually get about equal attention. I wonder if "Beyond My Ken" would defend that view. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)