Talk:Red (Taylor Swift album)#rfc 8C7F9C6

: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. Per consensus. – robertsky (talk) 07:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

----

:Red (Taylor Swift album) → {{no redirect|Red (album)}} – This article has 115208 pageviews over 30 days. This is considerably larger than the pageviews of other articles on a 30-day basis, with the King Crimson album that shares the same name only has 13220 pageviews and the rest having less than 5000 pageviews. This makes Red (Taylor Swift album) the primary topic in respect to usage. Brachy08 _(Talk) 07:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

:Note: WikiProject Taylor Swift has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

:Note: WikiProject Albums has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

:Note: WikiProject Rock music has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose original proposal, support Red (2012 album) to distinguish from the re-recording. (t · c) buidhe 09:15, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

:Oppose: Page views should not be the sole measure here, and Red (album) covers a lot more than just these two, including multiple other albums of high levels of established notability. Especially oppose buidhe's suggestion as R.E.D. (Ne-Yo album) is also from 2012 and highly notable, and "Taylor's Version" is plenty disambiguation on its own. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 09:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

::FWIW the R.E.D. album gets around 1-2 percent as many page views as this one. (t · c) buidhe 10:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

::R.E.D. and Red are different names. Brachy08 _(Talk) 13:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:PDAB, and oppose above alternative suggestions. 162 etc. (talk) 17:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

:Support: Clear WP:PDABPRIMARY. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 18:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose I don't think the ratios are sufficient for a PDAB.. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:24, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
• :Red (Taylor Swift album) has a ~7:1 pageview with all thirteen other "Red" album articles combined. If this is insufficient for a PDAB, what would be? JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 17:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
• ::I think more like 100:1 or 50:1 though I'm not in any case much of a PDAB fan. Per WP:PRECISE most qualifiers should be unambiguous. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose per Crouch, Swale. The usual ratio for a PDAB is north of 50:1. There are exceptions, but that's the usual experience, and the exceptions often involve other factors. Also, weighing a 2012 album relative to a 1974 (King Crimson) album requires discounting for WP:RECENTISM. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose, FWIW, speaking as a currently heavy user of album articles rather than from a policy perspective. When there are multiple "[Album] ([Artist] album)" titles, the expected behaviour is for "[Album] (album)" to point to the dab section listing the various titles. I can appreciate deviating from that practice when one of the albums is so much more popular than the rest that most visitors won't even be aware that there is more than one. Falling short of that, which surely is the case here, keeping with the strong precedent is the cleaner solution all around. - 89.183.221.71 (talk) 14:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)