Talk:Through a Glass, Darkly (Gaarder novel)

Move?

Can I suggest moving to Through a Glass, Darkly (Gaarder Novel) assuming the AFD is a keep? At Through a Glass, Darkly there are number of other novels, so I think dab is a good idea. Edgepedia (talk) 18:59, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, there is no consensus to move the article ~~ GB fan ~~ 05:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

---

Through a Glass, Darkly (Gaarder novel) → Through a Glass, Darkly (novel) — Although there are other novels with this title, only Gaarder's has a Wikipedia article, and so it should be at the simplest available disambiguation. There is no need for preemptive further disambiguation, and direction to the other novels with this title is handled by the existing hatnote.ShelfSkewed Talk 15:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the guidelines say about a case as this. While none of the other novels by this name have an article, at least two of them (those by Helen McCloy and Donna Leon) seem notable enough to have potentially their own articles. The Karleen Koen novel is currently better known and more popular than all the others combined.  --Lambiam 19:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose because (a) there is nothing broken here so no fix is needed, and (b) we can and should anticipate creation of articles about the other novels by the same title. 69.3.72.9 (talk) 17:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose When readers search for the novel and it does seem that it would be (more?) likely to be one of the others. When typing in the novel title in the search box you are currenly given the choice of (Gaarder novel} and (novel), so a choice can be made then. Edgepedia (talk) 17:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRECISION and WP:DAB. We disambiguate for existing titles, not prospective titles. An exception should be made where an article of a conflicting DAB nature is going to be created imminently, but we have no such knowledge here. It may be many years before an article is created on the other notable novel, if ever (if you really want to keep it at this title, be bold and go create that other article).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. If this move went ahead it's almost certain to need reversing later on. Why make work? Andrewa (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.