Talk:Andante

Requested move 25 August 2018

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 Andante (disambiguation) → Andante per consensus; slightly IAR but reasonably shown to improve the encyclopedia. No such user (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Andante (disambiguation) → Andante – There's a clear primary topic, but – paradoxically for some – it's better not to keep Andante as a redirect to the article where this topic is treated. Why? Because the article in question is Tempo, where "andante" is defined in the middle of a lenghty list, and there's nothing else in this article about "andante" other than this definition. For readers who want to know what "andante" is, landing at a small dab page whose first sentence defines the term is a lot better than getting sent to the thicket at Tempo. Additionally, it appears that these readers are a small minority: the pageviews strongly suggest that almost all readers who search for "Andante" end up clicking through to the dab page. – Uanfala (talk) 19:19, 25 August 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, although I do see your point. I think the musical term is the primary topic by long-term significance, but I don't think the (perhaps suboptimal) situation at Tempo, with a hatnote, is enough to break the guidelines at WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. However ... a longer term pageview analysis tells an interesting story, so I've amended the hatnote in Tempo! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:28, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think this is the kind of situation that these guidelines were intended for. Regardless, if a strict adherence to a guideline makes the encyclopedia worse, then we should ignore that guideline. – Uanfala (talk) 18:11, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. While the musical use of the term is extremely important, it can also be explained in a mere sentence at the top of the disambiguation page. No need to dump readers into a section that defines the word in the middle of a bunch of other stuff, especially when other uses exist. SnowFire (talk) 13:15, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - according to Uanfala's pageviews it seems that the tempo isn't even the primary topic, but the TV series is (I've gone and checked all entries here and the Homeland episode and Abba song also pass it). Also, the entry in the list says almost the same as what the disambiguation says (and this can be fixed to say the same exact thing) without adding anything substantial so there is no need at all for that to be the primary topic. --Gonnym (talk) 08:14, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Dreamy Jazz and Gonnym. A WP:DICTDEF (and that's all there is for the musical term at Tempo) shouldn't be a primary topic here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 15:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The tempo is a clear primary redirect. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support for reader service as described in nomination. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:57, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - until Andante as a tempo can stand on its own as an article (which may never happen). Red Slash 23:35, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.