This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time 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.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years 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.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Months in the 1900s, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Months in the 1900sWikipedia:WikiProject Months in the 1900sTemplate:WikiProject Months in the 1900sMonths in the 1900s 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. Most agreed that the month is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC based on long-term significance. A strong argument with respect to pageviews was given, but a clear majority seems to have felt long-term significance to be more important. (non-admin closure) VRtalk13:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per long-term significance and consistency. Chronological entities pretty consistently get top billing and it takes a lot to dethrone them. 1984 is the primary topic over Nineteen Eighty-Four despite the latter getting over 10x the pageviews. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠05:09, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They do. For every 4 people reading about the album, fewer than one is reading about the month. It is reasonable to assume, then, that people landing on the dab page probably (not provably) want those two articles in a very roughly similar proportion. What we can say with certainty, though, is that the evidence does not point to a majority of readers wanting to read about a month. Station1 (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't think we can infer with any certainty what readers who land at the DAB are looking for; perhaps they're looking for June 1976 in meteorology. We can't actually even say that a majority of readers want to read about the album: we might have one avid Grateful Dead fan who loads the page on average 23+3⁄4 times a day (perhaps they have a 15-minute tea break). I'm not saying either of those are likely, of course. But when the DAB page is averaging one hit every 1.4 days, some of which will be bot activity, I think it is difficult to draw any conclusions about what readers expect to find or do at the DAB page. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 22:25, 5 October 2021 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)05:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom and per points above. In terms of long-term significance, the name of the month will always end up being primary. BD2412T21:32, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
