This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre 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.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns articles
Material from Western (genre) was split to Western film (genre) on 13:18, 11 April 2023 from this version. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:Western (genre).
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.
Oppose - More discussion is needed. The inclusion of (genre) is a disambiguation of context. It identifies we are speaking of films that are Western (genre) and not simply those of "Western Civilization" (i.e. European or American, as film is a global medium). This disambiguation is consistent with other pages within the Western genre (such as the general genre page Western (genre) or in categories such as Category:Western (genre) films). ButlerBlog (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since there is no other relevant Wikipedia article that 'Western film' could potentially refer to, there is no requirement for disambiguation. When I read Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Deciding to disambiguate: "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead." Bartlea (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct that it is not required explicitly, but requirements shouldn't be read with the implicit assumption that the inverse is also a requirement. What I mean by that is that the requirement is when disambiguation is necessary; it does not cover disambiguation in instances where it is not required and should be assumed to mean that if it's not required, it should not be done. And required or otherwise, it would be subject to consensus. (FTR, this is a fairly new article and when published, it was reviewed for standards by new page patrol). ButlerBlog (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I'd probably be more inclined to support the original suggestion, simply because this is too close to Western (genre), the page it was split from. That page originally more on film specifically, but it expanded to include other media and subgenres over time and became quite muddled. All of the primary sub-media have since been split to a separate articles - this was the last one remaining. While my opposition is that the current article is not inconsistent within Westerns, Western film is not necessarily inconsistent with other genre articles. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Horror film and comedy film don't create any ambiguities. Western can read as either 'the wild west' or 'the western world' as a cultural and geographic grouping of countries. Disambiguation of a genre and region of origin. --Killuminator (talk) 22:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Western film (genre) is no more ambiguous than Western (film genre), so renaming it as such makes no sense. If you are going to disambiguate Western film then the correct disambiguation term is Western film (genre) because it is part of a series i.e. Comedy film, Horror film, Action film etc. Betty Logan (talk) 23:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Recent updates to the lead were actually really good in terms of content and writing. However, two key problems - first, it's not summarizing what's already in the article (which is the purpose of the lead), and second, it's entirely uncited, making it original research (see WP:NOR). Anything covered in the lead should be covered in the article in more detail. If it's cited in the body, that's fine, but if not, it must be cited in the lead. ButlerBlog (talk) 16:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]