Talk:Clank

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 October 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 03:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clank → Clank (Ratchet & Clank) — To replace it with the dab page, since there are several possible clanks, and to match companion article Ratchet (Ratchet & Clank). Also to replace with the dab page Clank (disambiguation), as has some support from the recently closed AfD. — 70.55.200.131 (talk) 10:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Oppose Apart from the implication that this use may not be the primary topic of Clank, no rationale supported by policy or guidelines is given in the proposal. Matching a related article is not a suitable rationale; a redirect may be created if this is thought to be helpful. Also, WikiProject Video games' naming policy states in part: "Do not disambiguate unless a naming conflict exists"; this name would be in clear violation of that generally accepted standard. No evidence is presented as to why another article may challenge this one for primary topic; a quick Google search suggests the NATO reporting name is not well-known (unlike some others), thus most hits to the Antonov an-30 (which gets comparable page hits) are unlikely to be via that name; all other options on Clank (disambiguation) are either about something with Clank in the name or receive too few page hits to compete; either reason disqualifies them as candidates for primary topic, thus this article stands alone as a candidate and should be granted primary usage. --Rogerb67 (talk) 23:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support If this is not the primary meaning of clank, and I see no evidence that it is, clank should be the disambiguation page, so that the greatest number of readers will get where they are going (often onomatopeia or wikt:clank) as quickly as possible. Since there are several meanings of clank, and only the common noun for the noise has any hope of being 80 to 90% of the usage involved (in practice, what we mean by primary usage), we should move. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Primary topic status is not determined by overall usage in the English language; it is determined by which of the available articles is a searcher entering the term likely to be looking for, per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. clank gets 3408 hits; onomatopeia has 1518 hits; how many different words are there that are onomatopeias? What proportion of these might be from clank? To suggest Wikipedia's primary topic might be found on Wiktionary seems nonsensical to me; primary topic status is about navigating wikipedia, not streamlining leaving it for people who should be at another project. In a simple Google search for clank, the topic of no other Wikipedia article except this one was linked in the first 20 pages, and most uses referred to the video game character; this is what is meant by primary topic. Note whir, clang, wham, caw, clink, tinkle, slosh, twitter, chirp, jangle, splosh, crinkle; all the primary topics of these pages do not correspond to "80-90% of the usage involved" in the English language; some are downright obscure. --Rogerb67 (talk) 00:30, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This needs to be turned into a redirect to fit match Ratchet, so this being turned into a disambiguation page with "Clank (Ratchet & Clank)" acting as the redirect is probably the best option. TTN (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.