Talk:The In Between/Archive 1

Archive 1

Requested move 11 February 2022

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.

Following a closure review, the pages were moved as proposed. — Wug·a·po·des​ 03:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

previous closure
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The result of the move request was: Disambiguate (largely per In ictu oculi): The In Between→The In Between (Booker Ervin album); The In Between redirected to In Between, a dab page The In Between (film)->The In Between (2022 film);The In Between (film), um, I guess redirected to The In Between (2022 film) as a primary redirect. While the film does take a lion's share of pageviews at the moment, it has been reasonably ascribed to recentism, and its long-term status as a primary topic has been questioned. As for the choice of disambiguators: "The" and hyphen are rather poor disambiguators, particularly among less-known subjects, WP:SMALLDETAILS notwithstanding. The items listed at In Between (disambiguation) include five films and eight albums; I concur that full disambiguation is called for. In summary, the existing situation was not tenable, but there was not clear consensus as to the best titles. Per WP:NOGOODOPTIONS, I'm picking what I considered the best of the options available. Should anyone disagree, feel free to open a RM. No such user (talk) 09:51, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

• The In Between → The In Between (album)
• The In Between (film) → The In Between

– The film released today on Paramount+ no doubt has usurped the 1967 album as the primary topic for this term. Page views have seen a noticeable increase in the last couple months, presumably due to users seeking the film. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support first, neutral on second. A dab page could be a better solution, as this move proposal reeks of recency bias. The In-Between could also be added to a dab page if created. Natg 19 (talk) 08:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
  • On second note, could redirect the base title to In Between, which lists all these articles. Natg 19 (talk)
• Support 1st, oppose neutral 2nd, redirect to In Between as no primary topic. The InBetween gets 5,892 views, The In-Between gets 4,894 views, the film gets 1,139, the musical gets 212 compared with only 557 for the album. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:37, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Crouch, Swale, please check again and reconsider. For daily average page views I see:The InBetween gets 371 views, The In-Between gets 441 views, and The In Between (film) gets 2,850 [1]. That’s at least over six times as likely as any other page, and four times as many as all the others combined, clearly exceeding, much less meeting, the “much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined” threshold. No contest. —В²C ☎ 18:47, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
• Comment WP:RECENTISM notwithstanding, take a look at the both the big spike in page views to the album page at the base name, and the single-day page views for the film article. It seems clear to me that the film will persist as the primary topic over the album, and we shouldn't unnecessarily send a majority of users to a dab page. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:39, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Or, to put it another way, even if long-term significance hasn't been established yet, an overwhelming majority of users are seeking the film, so let's send them directly there, with a hatnote to the album. To me, in cases like this, WP:PTOPIC is more about helping users than trying to defer to long-term significance, since in this case, it hasn't been established. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:43, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Is this even a significantly notable film? It was not released in theatres but just on a streaming service. Just because it was just released does not immediately make it the primary topic. Natg 19 (talk) 06:33, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, Paramount+ has been featuring it and pushing it pretty hard. ~10,000 page views in the last 2 days, whereas the album was averaging at most ~10 per day before the movie. Our goal should be to get the most users to where they want to go as efficiently as possible. Clear to me the film is what nearly all searchers are seeking right now, and I expect it will persist that a majority of users will be seeking the film over the album long-term. If that changes, whether there is a primary topic can always be reevaluated in the future. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

• I agree with Crouch, Swale's proposal, based on their analysis of pageviews. This is a WP:NOPRIMARY situation. Colin M (talk) 22:24, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't believe those page views are still valid. As of today, 955 views in the last 30 days for the album vs. 32,692 for the film, all in the last week (averaging ~4000 per day). I don't see how this can be a non-primary topic situation based on page views. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Also, we are only concerned here with articles with the specific spelling The In Between. I don't see how page views for different spellings like The In-Between or The InBetween are relevant, as they are not part of the requested move and are already disambiguated from the album and film via WP:SMALLDETAILS. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

I do think it's fair to consider the views for similar titles like The In-Between since such a typographic difference is subtle enough that many readers will not be aware of it, and might easily type the hyphenated version when searching for the 2022 film, or the unhyphenated version when searching for the 2019 film. That said, looking at the actual pageviews, I've come around to leaning support for the original proposal. Yes, the 2022 film was literally released a week ago, and is thus benefiting from an initial spike in interest. But, let's compare to the pageviews for a couple other films from the same streaming service. Those movie had spikes of interest around their week of release (peaking in the 10s of thousands). Now, several months later, their daily views are in the low 4-figures. Let's call it a 10x decrease. So for this film, we would expect a year from now for it to be pulling roughly 300-400 daily pageviews. That's still significantly more than any of the competing pages were getting last year. But I do think it's a sort of borderline case, and would still support dabifying as a second choice. Colin M (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Regarding SMALLDETAILS I'd point out that "The In Between" in a simpler, more conventional way to search than "The In-Between" and "The InBetween" since many readers won't bother to type the hyphens on InBetween as 1 word. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Crouch, Swale, SMALLDETAILS only matters in deciding Primary Topic if the titles that are distinguished only by small details are significantly likely to be sought relative to the title of the article about the topic in consideration. In this case they’re not, given the actual pageviews cited by Colin M. —В²C ☎ 02:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

• Nothing notable anywhere. Minor entertainment articles. Move album to The In Between (Booker Ervin album), disambiguation is required as a better sourced album is all that has existed since 2012 on the never performed Broadway musical (see dab page). Oppose new film becoming primary topic minor streaming film, and with such a banal and common title. Maybe even The In Between (2022 film) cf. The In-Between (2019 film). Rather than a separate page The In Between (disambiguation) listed on In Between (disambiguation) In ictu oculi (talk) 08:10, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
  • I urge the closer to dismiss this pure WP:JDLI !vote. “Nothing notable anywhere?” Notability is presumed in RMs; questions of notability are for AfD. Subjective considerations like “minor streaming film” and “banal and common title” are not factors in deciding primary topic, especially when the other topics that use the name in question can be similarly described. What matters is relative likelihood of being sought among these topics, which my esteemed colleague fails to even address. —В²C ☎ 02:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I expect that any eventual closer is able to think for him/herself and ignore this kind of trolling. It's a perfectly clear observation that none of these competing subjects are notable enough for a primary topic grab.In ictu oculi (talk)

Notability of a topic, beyond sufficient amount to have WP coverage, is not a factor in determining PT. Not “notable enough” to be PT is not an argument based in policy or consensus. It’s just more JDLI opinion. Relative likelihood of being sought is the main consideration, especially when historical significance is not a distinguisher, for which page view count gives us an accurate and objective measure. That’s where following policy and consensus leads us here, in case you’re interested. —В²C ☎ 01:13, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. None of the potential targets has established any notable historical significance, so that consideration is irrelevant to determining PT here. But on likelihood of being sought, the 2022 film, though new, is clearly way ahead and very likely to remain there for the foreseeable future. Regarding The In-Between (2019 film), that film has never had any notable traction by any measure. Even if everyone looking for that film omitted the hyphen this 2022 film would still be the primary topic, by a long shot. The bottom line is that since anyone searching with “the in between” is almost certainly looking for this topic, it is a great disservice to take these users anywhere besides this article. —В²C ☎ 18:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

Close revert requested

A request had been made of the closer of the above RM to revert their close. See: User_talk:No_such_user#RM_close_2. —-В²C ☎ 21:43, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

author

Who writen tha stroy 106.221.31.45 (talk) 12:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)