Talk:The Lying Game (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Requested move 27 May 2016[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn by nominator (see lower discussion). Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Lying Game (disambiguation) → The Lying Game – Currently The Lying Game is a redirect to The Lying Game (TV series), but the disambigation page should instead be at the "base" The Lying Game location. (Not sure – This may be relatively "non-controversial" enough to qualify for a "speedy move"...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I have reverted the TV series back to the base title, because it has been the stable title for a few years. Until there is consensus that the TV series is not the primary topic for "The Lying Game", no move should be performed. No evidence has been presented that the TV series is not the primary topic. The book series is merely a stub, and the three other links are merely individual episodes with no evidence of notability. SSTflyer 01:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Seriously uncool SSTflyer – you should have checked the Talk page before making this move. I am going to ask Anthony Appleyard (an Admin) to undo your move. You have also potentially put your WP:Page mover rights in jeopardy with this stunt. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:24, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Moving an article back to its stable title is not controversial. If any user opposes having the TV series at the base title, a new RM is required. SSTflyer 02:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - There already was a WP:RM discussion about this. You are ignoring its result. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:32, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - You are also ignoring the new circumstances – The Lying Game (book series) is new (or at least at a new location), which is why the extra disambiguation may be a good idea here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:33, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - The RM closer specified that there was no consensus. In these cases, where there is no consensus what the title of an article should be, the article should be moved back to its long-term stable title. Wayback Machine archives show that The Lying Game has been the title for the TV series in 2011, 2014, 2015, and as recently as April 2016. Restoring the article to where it was located for 5 years is correct here. SSTflyer 02:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        Soliciting Anarchyte's opinion on this, as the closer, and another page mover. I'd also like to hear from Godsy and QEDK. For more context, see also the discussion at Anthony Appleyard's Talk page. I still maintain that a Page mover should not do stuff like this without consensus – add: especially with this WP:RM still open! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:47, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whether this RM is open does not matter. When this RM was opened, The Lying Game already redirected to the TV series, so my move does not affect what a reader typing "The Lying Game" into the search box would be able to see. I am merely moving the TV series article back to the long-term stable and appropriate title, which was originally malplaced. Either way, The Lying Game should not be a redirect. It should either be the location of the TV series article (as it has been for the past 5 years), or it should be the location of the disambiguation page. SSTflyer 03:32, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SSTflyer is in the err here. Moving a page while a discussion was underway, as well as overriding consensus. Very uncool but not worth taking someone's rights away (it's not like it's a repetitive problem). Also, in cases of no consensus, you're supposed to not do anything, especially the requested move which failed in discussion. on the phone --QEDK (T ☕ C) 03:46, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was pinged. The rationale that because a title redirects to a page, it can be moved there without consensus (especially after a recent discussion concerning that very thing), is flawed. For example, Judas redirects to Judas Iscariot (as the primary topic), but consensus was against moving it there. All that said, this is a different. As a parenthetically disambiguated title, it can be argued that it is unnecessary if the term is to continue to point there (WP:D). Not expressing an opinion on this move request (i.e. The Lying Game (disambiguation) → The Lying Game) as I didn't reach this discussion organically. I think (and would have if I had closed it personally) that Talk:The Lying Game#Requested move 19 May 2016 discussion should have been relisted, not closed it as "not moved" in that particular state.—Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 04:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, for the record, I'm not even saying that The Lying Game (TV series) shouldn't end up back at The Lying Game – basically, what I'm saying is, 1) we should wait a month so we can get comparative page view stats for The Lying Game (TV series) vs. The Lying Game (book series), and 2) at that point we should have another WP:RM discussion about it. There's no hurry here – we can wait a month with the current status quo with no major damage to the encyclopedia in the meantime. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@SSTflyer, QEDK, Godsy, and IJBall: As per apparent requests to revert a move made during move-a-page discussion without the discussion being formally concluded, I have moved The Lying Game to The Lying Game (TV series), and then redirected The Lying Game to The Lying Game (disambiguation), to restore a status quo ante. The start of page The Lying Game (TV series) says that the TV series ran from August 15, 2011 to March 12, 2013 and was announced on July 15, 2013 to be cancelled. As time passes, the series will go back into the past and its fame will fade. (My previous move on 19 May 2016 from The Lying Game to The Lying Game (TV series) was part of routinely obeying a routine history-merge request.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawing move request (I'll let someone uninvolved close this.) – in thinking it over, we should leave the disambiguation page/redirect page status quo in place too. Let's leave everything The Lying Game where it is right now, and revisit this whole situation in late June when we have better pageview data... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:13, 28 May 2016 (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.

Requested move 27 May 2016 (continued)[edit]

@IJBall and Anthony Appleyard: Actually, if The Lying Game redirects here, (disambiguation) is unnecessary. Leaving The Lying Game as a redirect to The Lying Game (disambiguation) goes against WP:DABNAME.—Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 06:15, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, and I wouldn't object to it (though the DAB page might not be at The Lying Game for long, depending on later discussions...). OTOH, I don't see the harm in leaving everything as is for now, and sorting this all out in a month's time or so. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:30, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@SSTflyer: Special:Log/SSTflyer culminating in Special:Diff/722455051, wheel warring is unacceptable.—Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 07:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict)Anthony Appleyard claims that his move was to restore a status quo ante. The status quo ante is that the TV series is located at the base title. The reason given to revert my move was that an active RM discussion was taking place. Now that it has been formally closed, I am reinstating my move. Again, restoring long-term stable page titles is common practice at RM when no consensus can be determined. SSTflyer 07:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I have moved the TV series article to the disambiguated title per this request, as it is where the article was located when the RM above was closed. Note that there has never been any consensus for the TV series to be moved to the disambiguated title, and the disambiguated title is not, as Anthony Appleyard described, the status quo ante. SSTflyer 07:19, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @SSTflyer: My concern here is not that the moves are "wrong" per se, it's that your judgement here is questionable. I specifically said in my withdrawal statement, and in my reply to Godsy, that I think things should just be left for a month and revisited then. Why the hurry here? And why does it need to be you that makes these moves? Really, it would have been wise to just step back after the initial kerfuffle. There was no need for you to preform the move of the disambig. page. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:42, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - IJBall, I am not sure if you realize this or not, but you got what you wanted in this RM request. When you first started this RM request, The Lying Game redirected to the TV series. After my move and Anthony Appleyard's revert, The Lying Game redirected to the disambiguation page. Then you withdrew the discussion. Note that what The Lying Game pointed to when you started the RM and when you withdrew it was different. Anyway, when the RM was closed, the disambiguation page was malplaced (see Godsy's comment right below the RM), which is simply not acceptable and not helpful for one month, especially since you withdrew this discussion so that page views can be revisited a month or so later. Again, I consider the current situation to be suboptimal, and not really supported by consensus, but if it can minimize disputes, I am fine with it. SSTflyer 07:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Godsy: I have let Coffee, the Admin that granted SSTflyer Page mover rights, know about this, as SSTflyer is now clearly in the territory where revocation of Page mover rights need to be considered, and Coffee needs to make a determination about that. (It also occurs to me that "wheel warring" should be specifically added to the 'Criteria for revocation' section of WP:Page mover, but that should be a separate discussion...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:26, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @SSTflyer and IJBall: Conduct issues aside, looking at the page history, it does appear that SSTflyer is correct about the way things were before. The recent history merge complicates looking at it clearly (without the history of this page).—Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 07:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - (edit conflict)Thanks, Godsy. When I performed my moves, I really felt that the situation was not handled correctly. Per evidence I presented at the RM above, The Lying Game has been the stable title since 2011, and it is standard procedure for admins to revert a page back to its stable title if discussion is unable to yield consensus on a suitable title. I still do not think I have technically violated any policies, but I agree that my page moves did not help cool down the discussion here. For this, I apologize for making this a more hostile environment than necessary, and I will refrain from making page moves, even when technically appropriate, when it can create more disputes. I think maintaining the status quo right now (which I personally disagree with) is a good way to attempt to solve the disputes we have right now. SSTflyer 07:48, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - (edit conflict) @Godsy: He may well be – basically, an IP did a bunch of stuff that messed this all up a couple of weeks ago. I then asked Anthony Appleyard to undo the IP's messes. A WP:RM immediately followed on The Lying Game (TV series) which I procedurally opposed for now because The Lying Game (book series) was at a new location, and I would like to see a month of pageview stats before determining if either was "primary". (Separately Anthony Appleyard speculated that interest in the TV show has probably waned in the 3 years since it went off the air, and he may have a point...) My issue is – why can't we just wait a month, and do this right when we have some data to appraise all this with?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:48, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - The reason why I first moved the TV series article back to the base title was because it had been located at the base title for 5 years, and there had never been any consensus to move it away. SSTflyer 07:57, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        The difference, AFAICT, is that the book article either didn't exist, or didn't exist in its current form, before all this happened – so that's what makes this different from a month ago, when The Lying Game (TV series) was all by itself and thus the "only primary" around. This situation is sub-optimal because first we had an IP going on a rampage, and then you boldly step into a situation that would likely have resolved itself (peacefully, and without "dram-uh") in your preferred direction in just a few weeks time. This is one of those situations where not "using the tools" would ultimately have resulted in the "optimal" outcome in all probability. Really, a careful reading of the original RM discussion was all that was needed here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 08:07, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes, I know I have complicated the situation, and I apologize for this. No, I think we still have misunderstandings between each other, but now is not the best time to continue such discussion. SSTflyer 08:15, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Currently page The Lying Game contains the disambig page, as a result of someone (not me) moving it to there. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Lying Game (TV series) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:46, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]