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. 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: Mulan moved to Mulan (1998 film). Clear consensus for that, at least. Where should Mulan point? Clearly no consensus for that. I'm going to take that discussion up to WP:RFD and would invite you all there. (non-admin closure) RedSlash 01:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
– It's not that the 1998 film is the primary topic, since the legendary character is also known as "Mulan", and is the basis of the film and already widely known prior to the film. Further, the Mulan franchise of Disney's and the Disney character vies for prominence in Disney related topics, as Mulan is one of Disney's "Princesses" heavily promoted in Disney merchandising separate from the film series, and we have a separate article on the Disney character. Even in the English speaking world, as Hong Kong and Singapore are part of the English-speaking world, and MOS:TIES to the original legendary figure means that we shouldn't treat the United States as the jurisdiction that proves what is primary. -- 184.108.40.206 (talk) 14:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Support per WP:NOTPRIMARY - the legendary figure has clear long-term significance, with the popular Disney character being based on it. Even with respect to Disney there's ambiguity between the film and the character, with none of them being a clearly primary topic "highly likely to be the topic sought". I would prefer the name to redirect to Hua Mulan, similar to Cinderella and Snow White, but I see the case for a disambiguation page. Diego (talk) 15:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Comment I would have no objection to such a modification (redirecting "Mulan" to "Hua Mulan") ; I am the originating nominator of this RM discussion -- 220.127.116.11 (talk) 04:47, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Oppose the move as proposed, but support a move to redirect this title to the original subject, Hua Mulan. This is actually more in line with Robin Hood, a mytho-historic figure about whom numerous film adaptations have been made, including a noted Disney animated version. Here's our chance to actually be an encyclopedia, rather than a mere compendium of what's hot in popular culture. Furthermore, I would note that adaptations of an original work or concept are not truly ambiguous to it, since they arise from a common concept which is capable of being written about in an article. Like Robin Hood, that article should be the one on the original figure. bd2412T 15:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Support, disambiguation is always cleanest, and the film and the historical character are both highly likely to be sought. At least it should be a disambiguation page for a while to allow incoming links to be fixed more easily. —Kusma (t·c) 17:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Oppose (light), I also support Mulan redirecting to Hua Mulan as per rationale discussed above. This topic should be treated like Snow White, also with a simple hatnote at the top of Hua Mulan indicating the redirect and pointing folks to Mulan(disambiguation). I'd support the above proposal as a second choice, depending on whether a consensus can emerge about Primary Topic. - Metal lunchbox(talk) 06:23, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Support, to make it clear that once again, Disney made a movie about an existing faery tale, instead of coming up with a plot of their own. There must be almost twenty stories now that are better known as Disney movies than the original stories, which lasted decades, if not centuries, before the Disney movies. Nothing against Disney as such, but it has to be made clear that Disney did not invent these faery tales, as millions of children in the world must now think it did. JIP | Talk 19:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Support moving the film, but oppose moving the dab page per BD2412 and Metal.lunchbox - "Mulan" should redirect to the main Hua Mulan article as the encyclopedic WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as well as an effective WP:CONCEPTDAB for the other uses.--Cúchullaint/c 16:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Mildly support but strongly oppose redirecting "Mulan" to Hua Mulan. Chinese speakers won't call Hua Mulan just Mulan; and Westerners searchin for "Mulan" almost certainly have the Disney character in mind rather than the Chinese character. Would anyone redirect Robin to Robin Hood? Timmyshin (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Of course we wouldn't redirect Robin to Robin Hood, because Robin also refers to a variety of birds that are unrelated to the Robin Hood character, and Robin also refers to Batman's sidekick, who is also unrelated to the Robin Hood character. By contrast, there is no "Disney character" and "Chinese character"; there is only Hua Mulan, a Chinese character about whom Disney made a film. The question is more like asking whether we should redirect Einstein to a disambiguation page to distinguish the historical German physicist Albert Einstein from the fictional depiction of German physicist Albert Einstein in the film, I.Q.. bd2412T 15:00, 18 January 2014 (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.