Talk:Friends (disambiguation)

Proposed new layout

This disambig page has gotten quite big. I think the best layout now would be to divide things up into categories; however I'm not so sure it looks right, and don't want to make any changes until I've got further opinions. I've stuck the proposed new layout at Talk:Friends (disambiguation)/newlayout - see what you think, and give suggestions. Thanks. Nuge talk 01:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it definately was an improvement, but by now its out of date. S Sepp 20:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is society in a different type of category? - it (kindof) makes sense, that that meaning is given precidence, but maybe the second section should be given the name other meanings or something- not sure what the general schema is for disambiguation. Wideofthemark 00:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 April 2019

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 section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:53, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Friends (disambiguation) → Friends
Friends → Friends (1994 U.S. TV series)

– WP:ASTONISH. The sitcome invokes Friendship (a level 3 vital article) which is why it is plural, due to the fact that most people have multiple friends (unlike Hearts for example). There are a lot of entries at the DAB page and Quakers is a level 4 vital article (the sitcome is only a level 5 vital article). It would seem that although the sitcome is probably primary by PT#1, Friendship is primary by PT#2 and the DAB page at the base name serves readers/editors best. Disambiguation is consistent with Category:1990s American sitcoms and Commons:Category:Friends (TV series) (the base name Commons:Category:Friends is about friendship). Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:30, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There is no astonish, since the page is very highly viewed, most people probably are where they want, and you don't need to make them click extra. And Category:Friends is about the TV series. --Quiz shows 20:27, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Per above. As an aside, I'm generally not a fan of these discussions taking place on the disambiguation page, but that's a discussion for another day. Calidum 03:10, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Nothing astonishing here as far as I can see. Friends was viewed five million times last year; its daily average is almost as much as the total amount of views Friends (disambiguation) gets in twelve months. A roadblock isn't warranted here. Nohomersryan (talk) 04:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Friendship and Quakers get a large number of views to (although they are known by multiple terms). Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:47, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but move to Friends (1994 U.S. TV series) - due to other series with that name (WP:INCDAB), and per WP:ASTONISH and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (everyday usage and long-term significance). A TV show never deserves primary status over an everyday term from which it inherits its meaning - view counts be damned. Just like any corporate creation, we should follow the apple/Apple Inc. precedent. I am fine with waiting to move the DAB page for 30 days after the TV show article has been moved, to allow external search engines to catch up. ADDED: correction to disambiguation due to other series. -- Netoholic @ 10:24, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Netoholic I didn't notice that, updated. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:40, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And we have to move it to "1994 U.S." because Friends (1994 Moroccan TV series), Friends (1994 Canadian TV series) or Friends (1994 Japanese TV series)? © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 20:50, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get your point. There are other country series at Friends (Polish TV series) and there is another U.S. series at Friends (1979 TV series) (which would move to Friends (1979 U.S. TV series)). Most editors seem to prefer country-based disambiguation, but I suppose we could just use year alone and make this one Friends (1994 TV series). I'm not too concerned about which. -- Netoholic @ 21:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Apple In ictu oculi (talk) 16:10, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Too bad this isn't Friends, Inc. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 20:50, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying a TV show isn't a corporate creation? The idea behind apple/Apple Inc. wasn't because it was about the name of the company - it was to make a distinction between general knowledge vs. corporate use of a term as a logo/title. -- Netoholic @ 21:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per nom. I find it WP:ASTONISHING that out of ±10,000 people arriving here only ±30 require a disambiguation page. If somebody looking for the concept of "friendship" is doing it not by typing "friendship" nor "friend", but somehow through "friends", the hatnote already here is doing its job. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 20:50, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Like any topic, the vast majority of visitors come from outside Wikipedia via search engines. Those search engines largely don't care what we title our articles (in fact, they often specifically ignore page titles in favor of keywords and context). After a page move, on the very next scan, they'll detect the change in URL and start using that - often within 24 hours. Comparing with disambig page views is the false equivalence. -- Netoholic @ 21:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also DAB pages are less confusing and are easier to load, in addition to the fact that you have to load the sitcome page and the DAB if you're looking for Quakers or one of the large number of other uses. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you could prove that more people are looking for Quakers, Friendship or any other topic in the disambiguation page other than the sitcom (this is how it's done), then you'd have a point, because right now what can be seen is that merely 30 people per day visit the disambiguation page. Also, if "the vast majority of visitors come from outside Wikipedia via search engines" results to be true, then disambiguation is unrequired as the readers read: "Friends, from Wikipedia. Friends is an American television sitcom, created by David Crane and Marta Kauffman..."--that is not ambiguous. Now, let's assume a parenthesis is added, don't believe that magically visitors will decrease because the article says "1994 U.S. TV series" on their searches. What is true is that search engines give relevant links to what the algorithm considers is what people look the most when they search for a term. If I remove the TV series from it, the most common item they search is Friends (Marshmello and Anne-Marie song), a 2018 song (WP:RECENTISM). Even if removed, then Friends University and Friends-International (none of them is known as "friends") come next in relevancy for searches. So, instead on relying on presumtions, speculations and "other stuff exists", before nominating something for a move, first prove it is required. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 22:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Apple Inc. gets over 3.8x the views of Apple[[1]] yet the fruit is still at the base name. Friends gets less than 2.35x the views of Friendship and Quakers[[2]] and while neither Friendship nor Quakers are known solely by those words, neither is the fruit (since it is commonly referred to as Apples). If is doesn't work for the company Apple, how does it work for the sitcome. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:39, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would add that Nosedive (disambiguation) was moved to Nosedive (at Talk:Nosedive#Requested move 14 August 2018) despite that fact that Nosedive (Black Mirror) gets over 50x the views of Descent (aeronautics)[[3]]. Again given that the 50x views has no PT and the 3.8x has a different PT it would seem reasonable that the less than 2.35x at least isn't primary here (which is asking far less than Apple). Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Ridiculous nomination. —Xezbeth (talk) 09:14, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't see this move would benefit anyone. The only adjustment I might suggest is to include Quakers in the hatnote on Friends. older ≠ wiser 12:05, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I think the sitcom is the primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:23, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Absolute BS. Unreal7 (talk) 23:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Not a ridiculous nomination at all. The clear primary meaning is the plural of friend, however popular the series may be. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:15, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Most people are at the topic they are looking for. feminist (talk) 04:41, 19 April 2019 (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.