Talk:Transatlanticism (disambiguation)

Requested move 7 May 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. No consensus for the proposed move at this time. bd2412 T 00:03, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– No primary topic. I created the dab page here, as transatlanticism to me means what it means in Gbooks: Google Book results indicate that the Primary Topic if anything is 19th Century American literature. However there are also many references to United States Mission to the European Union and NATO. Finally there are a few references to the 97-charting album from 2003. Interestingly one of the recent literature sources (Straub, 2016) mentions the album as having picked up the trope from literature. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:41, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - too soon. Please note that Transatlanticism (disambiguation), Transatlanticism (culture), and the redirect Transatlanticism (politics) were all created recently by the same editor proposing this move. My searches don't indicate that the basic meaning of "transatlanticism" is anything more than a WP:DICTDEF-style word construction, and there doesn't seem to be a very clear, legitimate conflict. No move should go through until this new article at Transatlanticism (culture) can be evaluated and confirmed. -- Netoholic @ 08:51, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would welcome confirmation that Google Book results indicate that the Primary Topic if anything is transatlanticism in 19th Century American literature. It is unfortunate that the title of the pop album means something else to students of literature or US-EU relations. And we also need to consider whether or not we wish to cater to non-entertainment readers. If not then oppose the RM, by all means. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Really, because to me based on the histories I linked above, is that the only motivation here is a specific desire to not see this album at primary topic. And that a questionable stub, redirect, and disambig page have been created within the last day in order to make it seem like there is a naming conflict. It feels... manufactured or manipulative. There may me some legitimate topics here that conflict, but as I said above, its too soon to be having a move discussion. To illustrate, I can only find two uses of the term within Wikipedia articles (before the recent creations) at Lisa L. Moore and William Parsons Winchester Dana, and both uses are in rough DICTDEF form meaning, not related to this new stub or the new redirect. I would suggest you WP:DRAFTIFY the Transatlanticism (culture) article - it seems plausibly notable, but needs work and a proper evaluation to prove its a distinct concept, and not just based on a simple word construction that just happened to be in more common use at the time. -- Netoholic @ 10:06, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just let discussion be guided by Google Book results please. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Full disclosure: I moved the album back to Transatlanticism. I'm not sure why there's all this focus on the Google Book results – it's not the only method for determining the primary topic. Searching plain old Google, by contrast, almost exclusively gives hits about the album. Now it isn't really surprising that Google Books favors an obscure academic term and Google favors indie music, but without some stronger evidence to back up the common use of "transatlanticism" in scholarly research, I think that the album has a solid claim to being the primary topic. Conifer (talk) 01:53, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because of 2. 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. We generally check in books for long-term significance. Vanilla Google will naturally give WP:RECENT and entertainment based hits. However there's a long-standing tension about whether Wikipedia should be an entertainment portal or an encyclopedia, and that will remain whatever happens to the Book meaning of this term. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:14, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Five pillars - "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia" seems well-established. What hasn't been established is whether any topic broadly classified as "transatlanticism" (other than the album) is encyclopedic. -- Netoholic @ 11:29, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. None of these are well-known terms. An album by an obscure band is no more significant than the others. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:20, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Transatlanticism in literature, and Transatlanticism/Atlanticism in international relations, are two objectively notable and encyclopedic uses of this term. There really ought to be a WP:BROADCONCEPT article on Transatlanticism, perhaps merged with Transatlantic relations, with the other articles treated as sub-articles and moved accordingly (perhaps to Transatlanticism in literature, Transatlanticism in international relations, etc.) While the album still gets the majority of page views, that's largely an affect of the fact that we don't have a central place to discuss North American-European transatlantic relations and exchange. I expect a fair number of hits for this article are actually looking for the other topics that we don't as of yet treat coherently.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notably, when including Atlanticism, Transatlanticism (culture) and Transatlantic relations - all of which are also called "Transatlanticism" - the album gets only a minority of the pageviews.[1]--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:56, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How can you say the album "gets only a minority of the pageviews" when that graph shows it is tied at the top with Atlanticism and you've artificially limited the date range to the prior 20 days? Switching it to monthly views at max date range shows it was miles ahead of the others early on, but now alternates with Atlanticism for top article. The recent dip was due to the undiscussed move from Dec 2017 til May 2018, so I've added Transatlanticism (album) to the graph also (you'll have to mentally add the two together). At best, your evidence points out that we should add a hatnote to the album article, but it shouldn't be renamed because there is no legitimate direct competition for this precise article name. -- Netoholic @ 17:11, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just looking at the months where this article was located at Transatlanticism (album), it received fewer page views than Atlanticism, also known as "Transatlanticism". A decrease in views after the move suggests that many readers were getting misdirected when the album was at the base name. At any rate, there's no evidence that the album gets more views than all other topics combined, nor does it have any claim to higher long-term significance. It's not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:21, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's a false conclusion. You have to remember that when a page is moved, there is some delay in external search engines or other links, so a dip is expected. You HAVE to account for that in your analysis and take the results for Transatlanticism AND Transatlanticism (album) and add them together. The album gets more results than all other pages combined which actually compete for this exact title. Atlanticism is similar, but is at a different title, so the conclusion is, at best, that a hatnote would help readers. But not a rename. -- Netoholic @ 18:18, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a false conclusion, it's a look at the evidence as we have it. And at any rate, there's no evidence whatsoever that the album gets more pageviews than all other topics combined. "Atlanticism", being alternatively called "Transatlanticism" needs to be accounted for, as does Transatlantic relations - another potential target for people searching for "Transatlanticism". It's at any rate a much more historically significant topic, enough to show that there's no primary topic here.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shifting to support, if that wasn't clear already.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now. There are only two current articles that use the title "Transatlanticism", and of the two the album gets far more hits than the newly created culture article. If many people are arriving at this article erroneously (which I think unlikely), a hatnote is all that's needed. Should the new culture article gain significant readership over the next few months, this can always be revisited. Station1 (talk) 17:36, 14 May 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.