Talk:The In-Between (2019 film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 10 May 2022[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: not moved. Pretty telling when even the usual supporters of WP:SMALLDETAILS think a hyphen is alone is insufficiently precise to serve as article title. No consensus has yet formed regarding the target of the redirect at The In-Between. (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The In-Between (2019 film) → The In-Between – This should be moved back to its base name. This is the only entry at In Between (disambiguation) with this specific spelling, and the only entry with a hyphen, so it does not need parenthetical disambiguation per WP:SMALLDETAILS. It of course can certainly be confused for The In Between, or users seeking this page may omit the hyphen; moving to the base name will make it feasible to include this in the hatnote at The In Between and save users from going through the disambiguation page, which includes many other entries that are less likely to be sought by users searching terms beginning with "The". Mdewman6 (talk) 01:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. Turnagra (talk) 06:43, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, begrudgingly. While I'd prefer for both The In-Between and The In Between to redirect to the dabpage, a recent RM at the latter did not support that. Might as well have this one match. 162 etc. (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nomination and 162 etc. The two film titles should indeed be analogous — either The In-Between / The In Between or alternatively The In-Between (2019 film) / The In Between (2022 film). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 20:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am normally a strong proponent of WP:SMALLDETAILS, but this pushes the limits. It is nearly impossible to discern the difference between "In Between" and "In-Between", especially since the phrase is normally hyphenated. I support moving The In Between to The In Between (2022 film) instead of this. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support since there is only one other use which might be mistaken for this one, hatnote management for the portion ending up here by mistake is preferable to sending everyone to a dab page. —В²C ☎ 20:25, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Disclaimer: I was the closer of the mentioned (close-call) RM (moving The In Between to The In Between (2022 film)), which was later overturned on the (close-call) MR. I maintain that WP:SMALLDETAILS does not mandate keeping similar titles at undisambiguated titles, and I share the concern that the two titles are confusingly similar. No such user (talk) 12:49, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Even assuming the two titles are completely indistinguishable, this is our choice:
      1. Send 0% to the page they seek, 100% to a page with a link to the page they seek, or…
      2. Send 50% to the page they seek, 50% to a page with a link to the page they seek
    • I think it’s clear #2 serves our users better. And thanks for clarifying your supervote oppose-close at the other RM. —-В²C ☎ 13:41, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, I notice every source for this article references the film title with a hyphen and every source for the other article references that film without the hyphen. So I think usage of the hyphen or not is more significant than you think it is. —В²C ☎ 13:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Now, we have already stripped the clear and unambiguous (2022 film) from the first one, that would affirm that the 2022 film is indeed what the article is about. Now, we want to make it even harder and more absurd by stripping (2019 film) from this one, keeping just the "helpful" hyphen? For what end? If you ask this old fart, it's as useful as the trend of removing physical buttons from smartphones and electronic devices – that maybe makes them look fancy and sleek, but ultimately they're far less usable. No such user (talk) 14:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I get that, however, our naming conventions were conceived before WP search showed matches as you typed, and depending on browser version/settings, it still doesn’t necessarily do so. So we name our articles assuming there is no auto-completion feature when typing in the search box. I need to add this point to my FAQ. —В²C ☎ 16:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      And stripped is what many would find really useful. The disambiguation page. SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:26, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Zxcvbnm, I'm a supporter of SMALLDETAILS but agree it doesn't distinguish here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    But does it need to distinguish? Let’s say whether searchers use the dash is totally random regardless of which one they’re seeking. So half land on the film they’re seeking and the other half is one hatnote link click away. That’s worst case. In reality those seeking the title with the dash are more likely to include it, and vice versa. To the extent that’s true, the odds of getting to the sought page directly improve beyond 50/50 accordingly. How can sending everyone to a page they’re definitely not seeking—a dab page—be better? —В²C ☎ 09:00, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and move The In Between to The In Between (2022 film). A hyphen provides no disambiguation whatsoever. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Of course a hyphen provides disambiguation. One has a hyphen and the other doesn’t. That’s not ambiguous by definition (in the sense that’s relevant per WP:D). Every source cited in the two articles is consistent with use of hyphen or lack thereof consistent with this. Whether the hyphen is included determines which of the two the user is much more likely to be seeking. —В²C ☎ 15:44, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • It doesn't provide disambiguation as either may be spelled by anybody with or without a hyphen. Whether it "officially" has a hyphen or not is irrelevant as to common usage. Disambiguation is intended to help people find what they're looking for, and is not helped by pedantically arguing that one "officially" has a hyphen and the other doesn't. No normal person is going to think, well, that must be the film I'm looking for because it doesn't (or does) have a hyphen! That's the problem with WP:SMALLDETAILS and why However, when renaming to a less ambiguous page name can be done without wandering from WP:CRITERIA, such renaming should be considered should not be ignored, as it seems to be by many of its advocates. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:19, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • If they were distinguished by hyphen/no-hyphen only in official sources you’d have a point. But they’re so distinguished in all reliable sources cited in each of the articles. That’s well beyond “official” and well into the context which we rely on for determining COMMONNAME. The COMMONNAME for the 2019 film has the hyphen and the COMMONNAME for the 2022 film doesn’t. There’s no disambiguation issue here. —В²C ☎ 13:57, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yes, but that doesn't take away the fact that most people aren't going to have a clue which one has a hyphen and which one doesn't. As I said, disambiguation is intended for ease of use by readers, not for pedants. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • But what “most people” have a clue about isn’t a relevant measure. What people who are “familiar with” the topic in question is, and that apparently doesn’t include you, or anyone else opposing here. Thanks for the clarification. I’m sure the closer will appreciate this too. —В²C ☎ 03:39, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
              • So what you're saying is that ease of use is irrelevant to you because you're familiar with the subject, you know which has a hyphen and which doesn't and anyone who doesn't doesn't really matter. Thanks for the clarification. I’m sure the closer will appreciate this too. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
                • No, I’m not saying that. This isn’t about me. I’m among the vast majority not familiar with either film. As I write this I don’t know which has the dash. But anyone familiar with either film, as would anyone searching for either be, would know, especially if they’re searching after reading about either, given that source usage regarding the dash appears to be consistent. Worst case is they get the wrong one but then they are still just one (hatnote) link click away from their desired article, no worse than landing everyone on a hateful useless dab page. —В²C ☎ 20:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per the auto completion point raised above. When I look for things in the WP search box, it's often helpful if the partial matches contain useful disambigs, and a hyphen is of no use in that context. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is that one of the WP:CRITERIA? Let me check. (checks). Nope. Didn’t think so. 👀 —-В²C ☎ 03:39, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • B2C, there's no need to badger every person who posts an oppose. In fact WP:CRITERIA does state specifically that "the choice of article titles should put the interests of readers before those of editors", so WTR's concern about the possible effect of the proposed move on readers seeking this article is entirely relevant and appropriate to consider. ╠╣uw [talk] 13:19, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • The closer is supposed to evaluate the discussion based on how well the arguments are consistent with policy, guidelines, and conventions. To that end, it’s important to point out that search box auto completion effects is not a consideration the community takes into account for deciding titles, and, if it did, policy, guidelines and countless titles would be very different from what they are now. —В²C ☎ 18:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • No PrimaryTopic. A hyphen is too small a small detail, and hyphens are often dropped and added, and are often ignored by search engines. A leading “The” is too small if the rest is an ambiguous composition title. No one should be sent unknowingly to a disambiguation page, so repudiate the stupid MALPLACED, move In Between to In Between (disambiguation), and leave In Between redirecting to In Between (disambiguation). All future mainspace links redirects to In Between, and there are efficient ways to fix them, easier than fixing links to the wrong pages, which are likely because In Between is extremely ambiguous. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think we need to do that, the search box generally returns the DAB page last until you type the last letter of it, when you type "Hitcha" Hitcham, Suffolk, Hitcham Air Depot, Hitcham War Memorial, Hitcham, Buckinghamshire, Hitcham, Robert come up then Hitcham (the DAB page) but when you type the "m" the DAB page comes up first, for someone not wanting one of the options for a larger list like Colton wanting Colton, North Yorkshire the option to click "Colton" (the DAB) would probably disappear. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:10, 13 June 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_In-Between_(2019_film)&oldid=1199641235"