Talk:Live Forever

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Plants

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles

Requested move 21 February 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, per consensus. —usernamekiran(talk) 11:39, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– As much as I love the Oasis song, that is not the first thing that comes to mind when I hear the term "Live Forever". To me, the first thing that comes to mind is "immortality", and there are numerous other topics with the name "Live Forever". I consider "Live Forever" to be a generic term that has no primary topic. JE98 (talk) 23:13, 21 February 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom - no clear 100% primary topic. Paintspot Infez (talk) 13:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator. No primary topic for ambiguous term. CookieMonster755 ✉ 16:43, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't a generic term any more than "Last Forever", "Love Forever", or "Forever Delayed", all of which are articles. There are several articles but this is getting more page views than the others called "Live Forever" combined. Whether this is the primary topic probably depends on whether the plants are likely to be searched for much using this name. If the name is still commonly used for Sempervivum there's no primary topic. Peter James (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Too many possible subjects by this title, especially with the songs listed. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 16:03, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of other pages alone is not an indication that one is not a primary. There are lots of Paul Ryans and Gordon Browns, but we have a primary topic because it meets the requirements.--Yaksar (let's chat) 13:55, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support although the Oasis song is the first thing that comes to my mind. --Postcol (talk) 04:14, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Evidence indicates that this is the primary topic over other articles of the same name. Title case serves as sufficient disambiguation -- I can't think of any logical reason why someone searching for the page immortality would expect "Live Forever" typed with this capitalization to take them there, but for the rare few that do, the disambiguation link up top would sort them out. As for the other pages that use this capitalization, our usual metrics show that this is the primary topic. It's important to remember that disambiguation serves to aid the reader, not to fit what we feel deserves to be a primary topic.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:42, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oasis song fails WP:PT2. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there evidence of this, beyond gut feelings that it shouldn't be the primary? Because the metrics indicate that it is--Yaksar (let's chat) 13:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page views is WP:PT1. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. And PT2 is not "do the opposite of PT1." Nor is it "decades old songs that have been notable and widely viewed for a long time, by every metric by which we judge, cannot be the primary topic." So how is this failing PT2?--Yaksar (let's chat) 14:01, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PT2 often is unrelated to PT1. Popularity for media products produces giant page views for topics of little or no lasting encyclopaedic significance. This song is not a greater contribution to human culture than all the other subjects combined. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've said that you don't believe popular culture subjects like songs should be a primary topic. But that kind of gut feeling is not how we determine primary topics. And the guidelines to which you referred yourself make this clear.

Oppose, largely per Yaksar. This is not a generic term with the caps - an exceedingly unlikely search term for "immortality". And page views and book usage all point to the song as primary. Dohn joe (talk) 19:36, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. No clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, but by what metric are you judging this, besides gut feeling? I know I can come off as aggressive sometimes, but I genuinely do want to come to a consensus, but we need actual points to argue against to do so!--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:21, 7 March 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.