This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
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.
Oppose for now – The EP is too short to have an article in my opinion. If it can get removed then I would support this. JE98 (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The current title is fine as it is. The readers also don't have difficulties in finding this page because by simply typing "In My Feelings" in Google this page come as the first result, also by typing the same word in Wikipedia search box this page come as the first suggestion. Note that the nominator supported similar page move of See You Again and Shake It Off (the link already direct to the move discussion). Hddty. (talk) 09:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Appears to be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The Drake song is #1 in 10 countries, and a cursory search shows that none of the other songs on the list have appeared on any music charts. Additionally, none of the other songs have their own articles. The only other entry in the list with an article is a non-charting EP, and its article doesn't mention any reviews. — Newslingertalk16:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure recentism is a factor here, one way or the other. The original redirect created last year was to a 2017 song. The two with articles, the song and the EP, were both released in mid-2018. Dekimasuよ!18:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"The original redirect created last year was to a 2017 song."
I don't have an argument, and if pressed I would probably oppose this move. I did not say there was a primary topic last year. But to replace a redirect to a 2017 album with an article on a 2018 song is not really recentism at work. Both 2017 and 2018 are recent as far as WP:RECENTISM is concerned, so a bias toward recentism is not involved in calling any one of these the primary topic over any other. Dekimasuよ!01:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the Drake song is *overwhelmingly* the primary topic. Just look at the page views... an average of 9,884 per day for the song, versus 30 per day for the EP. This one isn't even close. And, as noted, 2018 vs 2017, recentism isn't really a factor. And neither are the other entries on the dab, as they don't have articles. — Amakuru (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No primary topic. All are too obscure and of no long term significance. All are commercial products competing for a catchy name. One is most popular, but it is not the first. Drake should possibly have to credit Boosie Badazz for the catchy title, who knows, Drake's had its beginnings in the period of Boosie's song's release. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how the Drake song could be considered "obscure" when it peaked at #1 in 10 countries, and is currently #1 for 6 weeks and counting in the United States. In terms of weeks at #1, the Drake song is currently the third-best performing song in America this year. — Newslingertalk16:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clear primary topic, Pageviews is obvious, and I fail to see how a list of non-notable songs and a barely notable EP could have a comparable long term significance to this song. Iffy★Chat -- 12:41, 23 August 2018 (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.
