Talk:Consolation (band)

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Metal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal music 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.MetalWikipedia:WikiProject MetalTemplate:WikiProject MetalHeavy Metal articles

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 April 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Requested move

Consolation → Consolation_(band) – to restrict the meaning km5 18:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Support "consolation" should redirect elsewhere. -- Beardo 21:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. Also, there is no place to redirect to. It may be moved later if an article on the concept of consolation is created or a sutible redirect target is fount. — Mets501 (talk) 19:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Following the reasonable trend above, someone capable should make Consolation a disambiguation page that includes a redirect here, to Consolation (band).--Wetman (talk) 17:17, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved in favor of a newly created primary topic article. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

– RM is required because of old RM in 2006 (2 !votes for, none against, but not actioned). In ictu oculi (talk) 07:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Accept. Consolation is the act of consoling someone who has suffered severe upsetting loss, NOT some routine ephemeral pop music band. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Nom gives no reason for move. The 2006 RM had no proposed target, so this is a separate proposal. Plus, WP is not a dictionary, so the fact that "consolation" is a word should not stand in the way of the term being primary topic for something with actual encyclopedic content. Dohn joe (talk) 19:39, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nom gives no reason for move because it should be self-evident - as it was to Anthony A above. Dohn joe your comment above, if serious, is a misunderstanding of WP:NOTDICT: simply because we do not provide dictionary definitions does not mean we do not provide disambiguation pages. Consolation (disambiguation) and other WP:DAB pages are provided where there is no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. And please don't put back the dab page to list "Consolation" Dutch band as primary topic, it is just creating work for other editors. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, yeah, In ictu oculi, you probably should have given a reason in the nomination. And actually, I think that an article could be written about consolation... we have a long and very encyclopedic article on mourning, so I would surely think we could write one on consolation. In the meantime, as you might expect, I do support because whether or not there's a primary topic to be found, this band surely is not it. Red Slash 05:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC) (See clearer support beneath the break Red Slash 17:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the Support - I cited previous RM as rationale since I agreed with the previous RM rationale and comments of User:Helianthi User:Beardo and User:Wetmanand saw no need to do other than agree. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Dutch band has been WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for going on eight years since the previous RM. If there is an argument that the band is not primary topic, then present it. The case is not self-evident to me. If an article on consolation is written, we can revisit, but as it stands...? Dohn joe (talk) 06:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per User:In ictu oculi, User:Anthony Appleyard and User: Red Slash above. -- Beardo (talk) 16:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anthony Appleyard is correct that "Consolation is the act of consoling someone who has suffered severe upsetting loss" - this topic, which is important to history, the arts, philosophy, and psychology, is the clear primary topic of the term. It is remarkable that we have no article on this topic, which is what should occupy this title. I therefore support moving the band to Consolation (band), but oppose moving the disambiguation page, because there is a primary topic. What we need to do at this title is to write an article on the actual topic. bd2412 T 02:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have started a draft at User:BD2412/Consolation. bd2412 T 03:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - By the way, anyone who is interested is welcome to pitch in on bringing the draft up to article quality. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that my draft is at the point where it can be moved to article space. I therefore support moving the article on the band to Consolation (band), and propose moving the draft now at User:BD2412/Consolation to Consolation, as the clear primary topic of the term. bd2412 T 04:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with BD2412. Now that there's something concrete to compare against, I think it's perfectly fine to give the new article a shot at primariness. Thanks to BD2412 for his good work. Dohn joe (talk) 01:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Justification for the move

Alright, In ictu oculi sees it as unnecessary, but I don't, so with no disrespect whatsoever I'm going to list some evidence for Dohn joe; I see no reason whatsoever to assume anything but good faith in the oppose, so here's why the band does not have any precedence. Everyone who types in "consolation" has gotten the band article regardless of what they wanted to see. That's 1798 people over the last 90 days. Of these 1798, very roughly one in eight people have gone onto the disambiguation page (discounting the surge of views coming from us as we examine the disambiguation page! ). Okay, so what's on that page that could be searched for? Well, for one, the album, which has 2746 throughout the same timeframe. (Believe you me, I'm as surprised as any.) There almost certainly will be a primary topic for an article on consoling people, some day, but in the meantime there's no primary topic here for the band. And again, User:In ictu oculi, you really should've put sources or some reasoning since even that previous RM did not include sources. Red Slash 20:29, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, interesting. Thanks for the numbers, Red Slash. So it looks then like as things stand, Consolation (album) should probably be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Consolation", right? If a primary topic-worthy article on consoling people gets written, then that might be a different story. Red Slash (and others) - what do you think? Dohn joe (talk) 01:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. A 3:2 margin is almost never enough to win WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It usually is enough to show the article on the 2 side of a 3-2 split is not going to be the primary topic, excepting extenuating circumstances (like long-term historical significance, like at Apple). Is there some reason that I have missed? Red Slash 01:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:BD2412/Consolation looks satisfactory to me. Support Consolation → Consolation (band), then User:BD2412/Consolation → Consolation; or Consolation → Consolation (band), then Consolation (disambiguation) → Consolation, then User:BD2412/Consolation → Consolation (''some disambiguater''). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support of move to disambiguated title and support moving BD2412's article to consolation. Red Slash 17:17, 6 December 2013 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not essential to create an article

In this case a good article has been created Talk:Consolation, but for the record Danzig, Defamation, Libel, Hurricane show that an article does not have to be created when a borderline Dutch metal group is sitting on a common synonym for other forms of comforting and counseling. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:46, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an interesting sidenote, I created comfort also. What can I say, I like the abstract topics. However, I think consolation is a distinct and important concept, and the best result for the encyclopedia is the creation of an article expressly addressing it. bd2412 T 04:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. There wasn't one as the de:Trost not being linked here illustrated. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Consolation (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090209033641/http://www.poppodiumromein.nl:80/agenda.php?id=264 to http://www.poppodiumromein.nl/agenda.php?id=264

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Consolation (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]