Jump to content

Talk:Ice Adonis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 7 May 2016

[edit]
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 as consensus to move the article has been reached. (non-admin closure) Music1201 talk 22:19, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Yellow BootsIce AdonisHollywood Reporter, DramaFever, GMA Network, and Variety this year use the proposed title. Korea Times and this Indian one use the current title. C21 uses both titles. The official English title weighs more despite very low mentioning of the series. George Ho (talk) 12:45, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In ictu oculi, can you just declare primary topic as illegitimate or something? You always obviously say things as if no primary topics exist. George Ho (talk) 21:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also, no reliable sources use "Yellow Adonis". George Ho (talk) 00:47, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying there can never be an absolute topic, Paris for example or the other relevant examples. I trust anyone participating in a RM to check for themselves. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Correct no reliable sources use Yellow Adonis at all. As for the translation, the Korean specifically says Noran Adonis, i.e. in Korean "Yellow" Adonis (which does exist as plant name), not "Ice" Adonis (no such "ice" plant name not in English not in Korean), none of these sources look particularly reliable... but since the Philippines TV has picked it up as Ice Adonis, then okay... In ictu oculi (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying Variety is not particularly reliable? Random86 (talk) 08:32, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Random86: Variety uses "Ice Adonis" not "Yellow Boots" or "Yellow Adonis". In ictu oculi (talk) 11:57, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@In ictu oculi: I already know that. You didn't answer my question. Random86 (talk) 12:09, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Random86: yes of course Variety is a more reliable source, that's one reason I'm supporting the RM. Oh I see, you're picking up that I said "none of these sources look particularly reliable". Well fair enough, there is one that is more reliable. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Which title, the original proposal or which else? George Ho (talk) 21:03, 8 May 2016 (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.