Talk:Heartbeat#Requested move 6 May 2025

An article in this space was nominated for deletion. The result of the debate was keep as a disambiguation page. For details, please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Heartbeat. -- BD2412 ^talk 18:55, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

THE HEART BEATS REGULARLY BECAUSE IT HAS IT'S OWN PACEMAKER. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.28.163.222 (talk) 06:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Added link to "Heartbeat", by Claptone ft. Nathan Nicholson, 2016 in Claptone Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.58.239.249 (talk) 14:17, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

:While your external link at Claptone technically satisfies WP:DABMENTION, it doesn't really add much information for someone looking for "Heartbeat". The song doesn't seem to meet wikipedia's notability requirements for a standalone song article either (Claptone himself only seems marginally notable). Still, I'd be willing to let the Claptone song be re-listed, but not all my other cleanup edits you keep reverting. Hoof Hearted (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

{{requested move/dated|Heartbeat (disambiguation)}}

:Heartbeat → {{no redirect|Heartbeat (disambiguation)}} – Cardiac cycle is the main topic. fgnievinski (talk) 13:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 17:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. There are 107 entries listed upon the Heartbeat disambiguation page and, while the entry "*Heartbeat, one cardiac cycle of the heart" should be more intuitively placed at the top, rather than at the bottom, of this long list of commonly used titles (following the form of the much-shorter Beating Heart dab page), transforming the main title header of this 107-entry dab page into one that users enter only after first seeing the putative WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, would not appear to be helpful. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
• :March 2025 [https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Heartbeat WikiNav data] seems to agree. 958 views incoming to the dab; out of 531 total views from the dab, 236 go to Cardiac cycle, 167 to Heartbeat (British TV series), 48 to Heartbeat (computing), and a couple other pages with 10 to 18 views each, including 11 to Beating Heart. While Cardiac cycle receives just shy of a majority of outgoing views, less than a quarter of the people who click into the dab are looking for that. (For future me's reference, the "Comparison Over Time" section only says, {{tq|An error occurred while fetching data for the current title. Try another one.}}) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
• ::April 2025 WikiNav data: 912 incoming views. Out of 508 outgoing, 204 to Cardiac cycle, 159 to the British TV series, 29 to the computing article, 17 to Heart Beat (TV series) (amazed DIFFCAPS holds up here but will stay on topic), 15 to Beating Heart, and a couple of other pages with 10 to 14 views each. Only ~40% outgoing views go to Cardiac cycle or a little over a fifth of people clicking into the dab. "Comparison Over Time" works now and is consistent with all other WikiNav data reported so far: 44.44% of all outgoing views in March 2025 went to Cardiac cycle, the British TV series received a little over 31% in both months, and all other pages received <10% for both months. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:I checked the clickstream article for last year, and the results seem to be consistent, there's no obvious majority of outgoing clicks to the obvious generic topic. However, this is also probably influenced to at least some extent by the previous weird placement of that link, that was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heartbeat&diff=prev&oldid=1289246477 fixed by Amakuru] only two days ago.

:So in that light, when we consider that the computing meaning is far outnumbered, and the entertainment meanings probably don't have long-term significance, this seems like a good idea. At the same time, I did do a bit of a double-check on the more general statistics:

:: [https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&start=2015-07&end=2025-04&pages=Cardiac_cycle|Heartbeat|Heartbeat_(computing)|Heartbeat_(British_TV_series) all-time monthly page views of this list and the most popular topics]

:The recent dropoff of viewership at the cardiac cycle article is odd. Its recent spikes in traffic generally seem to correspond with spikes in interest in the TV series, though there is some sort of a general seasonality to it anyway.

:In logarithmic scale, sometimes it looks like the ebbs and flows correspond to cardiac cycle traffic, sometimes the TV series, sometimes it's just flat or it's spiking for no related reason.

:The "heartbeat" traffic has distinctly downward trend, unlike any of these others. I'm not sure what to make of that. Maybe it means we're off the mark by not having a primary redirect, and the search engines are continuously compensating, better and better each month?

:Switching to a primary redirect is a reasonably conservative change that makes it possible to continue at least some of the measurements (we can still compare some of the page view stats, even if it breaks the clickstreams), so I'm not opposed to it. It would at the same time be nice if we could keep measuring this layout fixed for MOS:DABCOMMON for another few months, though, to make sure we're moving in the right direction. --Joy (talk) 09:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::Regarding {{gi|However, this is also probably influenced to at least some extent by the previous weird placement of that link}} -- shortly prior to that it had been [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heartbeat&diff=prev&oldid=1289164143 changed by 162 etc.] and had the generic usage formatted as the primary topic. older ≠ wiser 11:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Ahh, that's different then. I doubt we're going to squeeze out more than a modest difference out of the new section heading, based on some earlier examples. But this then does make me lean further towards keeping the latest status quo and measuring that first, and only then doing the primary redirect change and measuring that. --Joy (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose move. Monitor and re-assess, per Joy and others. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:41, 17 May 2025 (UTC)