Talk:Think Twice (Celine Dion song)

Canada: Music Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

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

Fair use rationale for Image:CelineDionThinkTwice.ogg

Image:CelineDionThinkTwice.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 November 2015

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: Moved to Think Twice (Celine Dion song). The song is clearly not the primary topic of 'Think Twice' as judged from Google Books. So long-term significance works against a move to unqualified 'Think Twice'. Keeping this page at Think Twice (song) was reasonable so long as it was the only song of that name for which we have an article, but now there are two. A variety of opinions were expressed in the discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 02:34, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{requested move/dated}}

Think Twice (song) → Think Twice
Think Twice → Think Twice (disambiguation)

– The game show has only one reference (and even that is now broken), the Celine Dion song was a huge hit worldwide and appears, to me anyway, to be far more notable than any of the other topics on the disambiguation page. Here are the viewing statistics too. [1][2] Unreal7 (talk) 23:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question what does Google Books say "Think Twice" refers to? In ictu oculi (talk) 18:17, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No answer? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, especially by usage. See the pageviews for last month:

So that's 84% for the song article - even taking the disambiguation page into account. That's pretty compelling. Dohn joe (talk) 20:01, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, and move back to original location at Think Twice (Celine Dion song) per WP:NCM - evidence from Google Books doesn't support that this song is significantly more notable than all other uses of Think Twice on the dab page. In particular, this song was only a No.1 in the UK, it was a No.93 in the US. Anyone over a certain age, or from the US, could quite easily be looking for the U.S. No.11 Think Twice (Brook Benton song) In ictu oculi (talk) 04:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC which reads inter alia, "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to usage, if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." The keyword is "usage" and at 1272 views and dropping... Now that the Brook Benton song has an article WP:NCM also applies. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how you can say that "usage" does not support this move. Views would have to drop a lot for this article not to be viewed more than the other topics combined. Correct? Dohn joe (talk) 20:16, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification. Yes, I do support move to Think Twice (Celine Dion song) as per my mention of NCM. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:27, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Richhoncho, and return to "Celine Dion song" per IIO, because the current title fails WP:PRECISE and WP:NCM, there being multiple songs with this title. Ambiguous disambiguation is a bad idea. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Dohn joe. By all evidence this is the primary topic; no need to throw obstacles in readers' way.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:56, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not moved, though, it needs to go to Think Twice (Celine Dion song) now that the Think Twice (Brook Benton song) stub has been created, with (song) redirecting to the dab page.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:05, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Clearly meets the usage criterion of primary topic and I see no argument why any of the other notable items listed on the dab, all pop culture topics, would be anymore educationally significant than this article. Jenks24 (talk) 11:54, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Think Twice (Celine Dion song). Oppose assigning PrimaryTopic status on any non academically significant pop commercial product regardless of pageviews. No one seeking any Think Twice topic will be helped by the proposed move. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:14, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Worth noting that this is actually an oppose. I think it's pretty clear that if there is no consensus to move to the primary topic, then "Celine Dion" will need to be added to the title. Jenks24 (talk) 13:27, 12 December 2015 (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.

A hit in germany thanks to a RTL Show

The song was initially a flop in Germany when it was released as a single

but it reentered the charts and peaked at #19 after the broadcast of a german contest show on german television when BIANCA SHOMBURG performed it and won the contest

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Think Twice (Celine Dion song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160111053310/http://www.hitlistan.se/netdata/ghl002.mbr/lista?liid=43&dfom=19950001 to http://www.hitlistan.se/netdata/ghl002.mbr/lista?liid=43&dfom=19950001

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 November 2018

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. Consensus appears to lean against the proposed move at this time. bd2412 T 03:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– I know I made the same request three years ago, but you can't equate existence with notability, particlarly when the dab page is more popular than the other two articles COMBINED.[3] Unreal7 (talk) 20:55, 22 November 2018 (UTC)--Relisted. –Ammarpad (talk) 06:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - no primary per prior discussion. All of the items on the disambiguation page stem from the phrase used in everyday conversation. -- Netoholic @ 22:13, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAD. Unreal7 (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - no primary as demonstrated previously In ictu oculi (talk) 17:03, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. My goodness. When more people are going to the dab page than the lesser two viewed articles combined, something is broken and we are not serving our readers. This article definitely meets the usage primarytopic criterion, and a "phrase used in everyday conversation" is not one of the criteria of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Making this move would help our readers get where they want to go. Dohn joe (talk) 19:34, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Dohn joe. This is the clear primary topic, and there is evidence the current setup is a hindrance with a DAB page that highly viewed. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Netoholic and In ictu oculi. Arguments against the song's placement as the primary topic have been stated at Requested move 17 November 2015, above, and those arguments are still valid. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:13, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The page view analysis shows that readers are finding the Celine Dion song perfectly well without going near the DAB page: 71 and 6 daily views respectively. Defining any WP:PTOPIC is a guarantee that it will slowly but surely accumulate bad links which are unlikely to be found and fixed, thereby degrading the encylopaedia. In contrast, bad links to DAB pages nowadays get found and fixed or tagged {{dn}} within 4 or 5 weeks. Narky Blert (talk) 14:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Narky Blert - isn't it concerning, though, that more people are going to the DAB page than the other articles combined? Doesn't that suggest that there are more bad links now, and more misdirection of the readership, than if we move the basename to the Celine Dion song? Dohn joe (talk) 18:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Dohn joe: There are currently no bad links to the DAB page. I found this discussion because User:DPL bot had flagged the WP:RM request as a WP:INTDABLINK error (which technically it is), see here. Narky Blert (talk) 19:24, 4 December 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. No further edits should be made to this section.