Talk:The Power and the Glory

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 8 May 2020[edit]

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 to move -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– The entry for Graham Greene's novel was created in March 2004, while the disambiguation page was created in February 2006, thus the novel has remained as a stable WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for a long time. However, as of this writing, there are 17 entries at The Power and the Glory (disambiguation) page and if it was before, it may no longer be clear now that the novel's renown overwhelms all the other entries combined, including the phraseology from the Lord's Prayer. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. A mere headcount is not hard evidence there is no primary topic, especially when many of these "17 entries" cited do not have articles or are not explicitly called "The Power and the Glory". No other article comes close to the novel in views, so I think the current setup is fine. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Judging by the pageviews of most entries on the DAB, the novel is roughly half the total - and that's without considering the original phrase in the Lord's Prayer. I believe that since on WP:PRIMARYUSAGE the novel is not "more likely than all the other topics combined to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term" and because the phrase originates in the Lord's Prayer, a topic with much more long-term significance, that there is WP:NOPRIMARY and all should be disambiguated to assist editors in not linking to the wrong topic. A survey of the current Special:WhatLinksHere/The_Power_and_the_Glory should be done to correct any incorrect incoming links, of which, even at a glance, its apparent there are many. -- Netoholic @ 03:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moderate support as per Netoholic, but with the novel (and Lord's Prayer) before other entries on the dab page. Prima facie, a novel isn't likely to be primary for long-term significance over an arcane phrase making up the most ambiguous third of the final line of a prayer recited by a third of humanity (an analysis of which is likely to be sthg genuinely sought by readers). Llew Mawr (talk) 04:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are only 7 articles titled "The Power and the Glory" on WP, not 17, and the novel gets 2/3 of the pageviews of those articles. No more than approximately 2% of readers landing on the novel go on to the dab page, indicating a lack of significant confusion. And although the Lord's Prayer is certainly an encyclopedic topic, the isolated phrase "the power and the glory" is not; it's unlikely many readers seeking the Lord's Prayer are searching for it by typing "The Power and the Glory". Station1 (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the nomination did not state that there are 17 articles at The Power and the Glory (disambiguation) page", but that "there are 17 entries", nor did it state that all of those entries represented stand-alone articles or that all of those entries used the exact main title header "The Power and the Glory". However, when contributors contemplate and settle upon consensus regarding a dab page primary topic, they may consider the totality of the page and not solely focus upon the exactly-titled entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:05, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The nom did clearly say "17 entries" and I did not mean to imply otherwise. I do think only article titles should be considered when proposing to disambiguate article titles, and that was the point I was making. The 10 other entries either do not belong on the dab page at all, or belong in a "See also" section. They are either not notable (and therefore highly unlikely to be searched for to any significant degree) or not the same title (and therefore not in conflict). There are rare cases where we need to consider an article that reasonably could bear the same title even though it does not. As a hypothetical example, if the article "Lord's Prayer" could reasonably instead have the title "The Power and the Glory" (to the extent that a significant number of readers would expect to find the topic under that title), then Lord's Prayer would be the primary topic for "The Power and the Glory". But that's simply not the case here. Station1 (talk) 21:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "The Power and the Glory" is NOT this novel, rather the phrase in the Lord's Prayer. However, this novel makes reference to the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and is well an allusion to the doxology, furthermore, this phrase in the Lord's prayer does NOT currently have a separate page from the Whole (Lord's) Prayer, hence, this page title is clearly NOT a confusion to Wikipedia readers and may be kept since there is also a disambiguation page. TheEpistle (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Power_and_the_Glory&oldid=1205658645"