Jump to content

Talk:Very Nice

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

Requested move 26 June 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. Rough consensus to move. While the numbers were roughly evenly divided, those supporting the move had the stronger arguments as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 22:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


– Maybe an eager move, but there is only one article within the current mainspace. There are no mentions to "Very Nice" in Borat's article, the only Dermansky novel with an article is a stub, and only one album under the record label has an article, plus the label would likely be "Very Nice Records" if it had an article. Not to say these other things wont eventually be notable, but in the meantime I would say the song is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC Orangesclub (talk) 06:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 06:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 03:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add now that the song article has been up for a few days we have view counts: [3]
The song gets the vast majority of the traffic. Orangesclub (talk) 13:02, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: While I'm seeing a rough consensus, I'm relisting in the hope of a consensus, or lack thereof, becoming clearer BilledMammal (talk) 03:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Hameltion, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠, Randy Kryn and Necrothesp. There are five entries (four of which are WP:DABMENTIONS) listed upon the Very Nice disambiguation page and, since the song's renown does not appear to have spread within the English-speaking world, it seems best to retain the dab page main title header in its existing form. —Roman Spinner (talkcontribs) 22:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. "Sounds generic" is not one of the criteria for primarytopic. Notable uses of the article title are. Here, there's just one notable use - this song. WP:SMALLDETAILS also applies here. Dohn joe (talk) 23:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per nom and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Arguments against moving have been adressed in my opinion; no other DABed subject seems to have any sort of primacy or even much independent notability. There's nothing inherently wrong with a "generic" title with another literal meaning when that meaning is clearly out-of-scope to an outside observer; not many people are coming to WP for a description of "very-niceness" Quadrantal (talk) 06:13, 18 July 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.