Talk:London Burning: Portraits from a Creative City

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 November 2015. The result of the discussion was withdrawn by nominator.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Requested move 9 September 2018

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: not moved. (non-admin closure) KCVelaga (talk) 04:46, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

London Burning: Portraits from a Creative City → London Burning – Per WP:SUBTITLE. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 03:12, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Hhkohh (talk) 03:13, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Seems like a common name Hhkohh (talk) 03:13, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hhkohh: How do you reconcile your position with our book-specific guideline, WP:SUBTITLE, which states:

Usually, a Wikipedia article on a book (or other medium, such as a movie, TV special or video game) does not include its subtitle in the Wikipedia page name, per WP:CONCISE. The only exception to that is short article titles, for disambiguation purposes.

142.160.89.97 (talk) 03:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SUBTITLE is not a policy, just a guideline, see also WP:COMMONNAME and other related policy Hhkohh (talk) 09:59, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support I see no issue with the requested move, and it abides by the given guideline. -- Alex^TW 03:35, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - just about sufficient difference between this and London's Burning, but there should be a hatnote. — Amakuru (talk) 10:10, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and redirect suggested title to Great Fire of London. Maybe seems like a stretch, but some reader's will be literal in their searches and the great fire has long-term historical significance. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:06, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and redirect target to London's Burning (note: I have already done this, actually, since the target didn't exist). In the unusual case where the reader wants to see about a near-stub article on a topic of boderline notability, it will be listed on the disambig page there. SnowFire (talk) 15:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SnowFire: How do you reconcile that with WP:SMALLDETAILS? 142.160.89.97 (talk) 18:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because the resulting redirect would be WP:ASTONISHing? Because this article should arguably be sent to Articles For Deletion anyway? Note, if your concern is that the subtitle is irrelevant, I have no complaints about a move to London Burning (book). Strictly on the basis of "where should London Burning go?", however, note that I said "unusual case". It seems unlikely many readers who type in "London Burning" are looking for this book, so a disambig page is a proper place to land. A "small details" argument might be okay if usage was split 50/50 between London Burning (the book) and London's Burning (the album, etc.), but not when the split is like 99/1 against. (I point you to the pageview statistics, which show an amazing maximum of ONE pageview a day for the past month, with several days at 0.) SnowFire (talk) 19:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - per SnowFire and WP:NATURALDIS. I was a little bit surprised when I saw that redirect until I read your comment, as it wasn't there when I previously saw this request. Good find. --Gonnym (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose cited guideline does not apply as disambiguation and long title are clearly beneficial to readers here, and in cases without (book) WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT works for short titles. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:24, 10 September 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.