Talk:Funland
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Requested move 24 June 2019
[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: moved (closed by non-admin page mover) DannyS712 (talk) 21:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
– No clear primary topic [[1]] given the fact that the amusement parks are more likely to be primary by PT#2 and a Google Image search mainly returns amusement parks. Also the film is older. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- Kinda agree, but it does appear to dominate the pageviews. PC78 (talk) 23:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- Add views for Funland (Hayling Island) (when it was at that title) and you get 77,976 for the tv series v 43,620 for the others which means its claim to PT#1 is tenuous. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- Doesn't make that mich difference. Around 64% of pageviews isn't tenuous at all. It's the exact opposite of a "complete fail". PC78 (talk) 09:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- But wait. Aren't a large number of the pageviews for Funland just people looking for Funland amusement park, or the movie Funland or the person Funland whatever? Right? A very large majority as far as we know? Unless I'm missing something? If so, please explain, absent that it seems that pageviews has approximately zero relevance in this particular argument. Herostratus (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- But how do you know most people are actually looking for something else, what's the basis for that assumption? If that were actually the case I would expect the pageviews to show some evidence of this, but it's just not there. PC78 (talk) 18:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- I don't know. I'm guessing. Nobody knows. I'm assuming that some people people looking for the SegaWorld London Funland, or the clown movie called *Funland*, or Uncle Art's Funland, or Funland amusment part in Plymouth, and so on (probably FWIW including a lot of attempts to find Funlands we don't have material on), are just searching on the term "funland". Why wouldn't they? Since this would be normal and is pretty much how people do look for sta=uff, the onus would be on you to show a reason why the particular term "funland" would shake out differently that similar case.
- But how do you know most people are actually looking for something else, what's the basis for that assumption? If that were actually the case I would expect the pageviews to show some evidence of this, but it's just not there. PC78 (talk) 18:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- But wait. Aren't a large number of the pageviews for Funland just people looking for Funland amusement park, or the movie Funland or the person Funland whatever? Right? A very large majority as far as we know? Unless I'm missing something? If so, please explain, absent that it seems that pageviews has approximately zero relevance in this particular argument. Herostratus (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- Doesn't make that mich difference. Around 64% of pageviews isn't tenuous at all. It's the exact opposite of a "complete fail". PC78 (talk) 09:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- Add views for Funland (Hayling Island) (when it was at that title) and you get 77,976 for the tv series v 43,620 for the others which means its claim to PT#1 is tenuous. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:16, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- So this is why the article Funland, which is about an obscure early-century British TV show which ran for 11 episodes and has little in its article beyond a plot description, is pulling in more page views than all other instances of funland-named things, by far. People are landing on it and then
- The other explanation would have to be that 1) an otherwise unremarked-upon mania for the plot summaries of this TV show is a hidden current in world culture, and 2) people looking for the other entities are mostly searching on "Funland film" and "Funland album" and "Funland comic strip" and so forth instead of just "Funland", which would highly unusual, and why.
- HOWEVER, after having written that... that seems to make sense so I'll post it, but now I just looked at page views, and page views for Funland (disambiguation) seem awfully low if people are bouncing over there from Funland. About 3 people a day, which is as near to zero as makes no difference.
- I can't explain this, and 3 views per day for Funland (disambiguation) seems flat out impossible, so maybe a wiser head can figure out whats going on here. Herostratus (talk) 02:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- Strong support completely fails by (less important) page views and are more likely to be primary by the second criteria In ictu oculi (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- Support. My default hypothesis would be that it's very unlikely that this obscure TV show is the clear main meaning for "Funland". Don't know, or even if it can be known, but that's my best educated guess based on my horse sense. Absent a decent argument to the contrary (haven't seen one yet), I'm supporting the move. Herostratus (talk) 14:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
- Support. I can't determine a primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:10, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- Support – no PT. Dicklyon (talk) 04:39, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
- Support per nom - no clear primary topic. Move disambiguation page to basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:55, 30 June 2019 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.