Talk:Eternal Flame (song)

The following discussion is an archived 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: No consensus to move. Cúchullain ^t/c 16:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eternal Flame (song) → Eternal Flame – Of the items capitalised on the dab page, this one as chart hit for the Bangles and Atomic Kitten is most certainly more notable than the rest, and there's no need for disambiguation with differing capitalisation, see e.g. Glass onion. --The Evil IP address (talk) 12:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - seems the primary meaning for this capitalisation (although there are still a few internal links to Eternal Flame that would need correcting). Prouder Mary (talk) 14:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Prouder Mary. Unreal7 (talk) 20:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose; I can far too easily see readers looking for eternal flame but using title case. I don't think case is sufficient disambiguation in this situation. Powers ^T 22:45, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per User:LtPowers and the existence of other Eternal Flames. Moving the song article would not save any time for users who type "eternal flame" and are seeking the song. They would still need to click once on the hatnote to get to the dab page and a second time to get to the song article. On the other hand, a move would inconvenience readers looking for eternal flame but using title case. —  AjaxSmack  00:53, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Certainly not the primary topic. We shouldn't disambiguate just by capitalisation. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then move Cash Machine, Ice Cube and Black Caviar. Unreal7 (talk) 22:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Those are the primary topics of those terms or at least the most important encyclopedic usage. There is no article called
      black caviar and ice cube is not that significant beyond the DICDEF. —  AjaxSmack  02:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • Significance aside, Unreal7 is correct that those are cases where we decided capitalization was sufficient disambiguation. Certainly I take your view, that sometimes it's acceptable and sometimes it's not, but Necrothesp was drawing a bright line in an uncustomary spot. I suppose Red Meat is the canonical example that Unreal7 could have mentioned. Powers ^T 14:59, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • That and Peanuts and Duck Sauce as well. Unreal7 (talk) 18:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well, Peanuts is disambiguation-by-pluralization, not -capitalization, but I suppose it's a similar concept. Powers ^T 02:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Sorry Peanuts was a bad mistake. I meant just Duck Sauce. Unreal7 (talk) 22:14, 30 September 2012 (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.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a

requested move

. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. Consensus is clearly opposed to the proposed move. bd2412 T 18:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• At minimum I'd point Eternal Flame to Eternal flame (disambiguation) similar to Red Meat going to Red meat (disambiguation). Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• weak Oppose, but support redirecting Eternal Flame to Eternal flame (disambiguation) per above. No primary topic for the capitalized version, so it's safest to disambiguate. Paintspot Infez (talk) 17:26, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose as not
  WP:PRIMARYTOPIC among the various topics listed on the disambiguation page (usage is not "more likely than all the other topics combined" to be sought out). I'd support moving Eternal flame (disambiguation) to Eternal Flame though, since most entries use that spelling. -- Netoholic @ 18:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose. Recentism. The eternal flame concept is worldwide and ages old. There's simply no way that the song can be "on a par with the eternal flame concept in significance". SteveStrummer (talk) 19:50, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Perhaps, but it's arguable the "eternal flame" concept isn't really a unified concept at all, which weakens its case for being the primary usage of the term. Britannica has no article on the topic, and several of our article's references don't even use the term at all.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. 30 years is not recentism. Unreal7 (talk) 21:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the long haul, yes, it is. SteveStrummer (talk) 21:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Primary topic debates are about balancing common usage with long-term significance, and although in 100 years time the song may be gone from the memory while the flame concept lives on, we also have to consider what is likely to be sought today, particularly the title-case version.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose this move 2601:541:4500:1760:85AE:2112:3339:DE58 (talk) 17:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per
  WP:ASTONISH. Clear primary redirect. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:36, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]