Talk:Reanimation

Medical reanimation

Although these uses are not specifically supported by the articles, and so should technically not be included here per MOS:DAB, any quick internet search will show that the term "medical reanimation" is routinely used to describe various types of medical resuscitation. If you want to be letter-of-the-law about it, you can remove these entries, but I have chosen to leave them.--ShelfSkewed Talk 05:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 May 2016

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: no consensus. QEDK (T ☕ C) 16:59, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment.

Links: current log • target log

– No absolute majority meaning for [reanimation]; the "reanimation is" test suggests nerve damage reanimation. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose no evidence this isn't the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC compared to items meeting MOS:DABENTRY. SSTflyer 15:05, 24 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.

Requested move 13 October 2016

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: pages moved. Reanimation (album) will remain as an {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 15:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

– WP:ASTONISH, the Frankenstein article is currently linking to an album article. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says "Although a word, name or phrase may refer to more than one topic, it is sometimes the case that one of these topics is the primary topic" - which means that case for a primary topic needs to be proven. Having (Linkin Park album) on the Linkin Park album is nearer to the aims of WP:TITLE both for WP:RECOGNIZABILITY and "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term." Yes Reanimation (facial), Reanimation (science fiction) are only redirects, but the topics exist as articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:56, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. The album is most certainly not the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per above. Randy Kryn 16:34, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, I am more concerned with what you were doing. What's the sense of creating Nerve reanimation to later move it to Reanimation (facial surgery), or moving Corporeal reanimation to Reanimation (horror) to be moved again to Reanimation (science fiction)? Are you unable to create redirects instead of creating chains that a bot will take hours to fix, or am I missing something? © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 05:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom MrStoofer (talk) 13:20, 21 October 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.