Talk:Daddy-O (film)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Episode coverage

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

On 1 March 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Daddy-O to Daddy-O (film). The result of the discussion was moved.

Fair use rationale for Image:Daddy-O.jpg[edit]

Image:Daddy-O.jpg 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) 07:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 March 2024[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) – Hilst [talk] 12:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daddy-O → Daddy-O (film)
Daddy-O (disambiguation) → Daddy-O

– No primary topic by pageviews, and mixed search results show no primacy of the film over other meanings. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 17:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the rapper has more views (102,917) than the film (95,297) and I would argue a person is more important than a film. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. No cleary primary topic for this title. The safest bet is to have the disambiguation page at the basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination; Crouch, Swale and Paintspot Infez. There are five entries listed upon the Daddy-O (disambiguation) page (and another closely related entry under "See also"), with no indication that the 1958 B-film has retained such iconic status that it dwarfs the combined notability of all the remaining entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 04:23, 2 March 2024 (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.