Talk:Michelle Williams on screen and stage

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. Most editors in the discussion note that

Michelle Williams on screen and stage → Michelle Williams (actress) on screen and stage – The subject which this article refers is allocated at Michelle Williams (actress), the article Michelle Williams is a disambiguation page, and Michelle Williams (singer) has also acted and has a list of filmography at Michelle Williams (singer)#Filmography. Steel1943 (talk) 20:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom. Clunky, though. Mid-title parentheses are ugly. Suggest considering disambiguating both Michelle Williams by their middle names.
  Michelle Ingrid Williams. Thus Michelle Ingrid Williams on screen and stage. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Proposed at Talk:Michelle_Williams_(actress)#Requested_move_6_December_2019. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose middle name usage; Support some kind of change. A sub-page of a topic should use the same title of the topic, not use a different title. Unless the actress article changes as well, there is absolutely no reason to add her middle name here. Regarding original proposal, I do agree that since
  Michelle Williams filmography (which should be moved) could be just as valid to it as it is to here. However, I have an issue with the disambiguation of "actress" - any person acting in a film, TV or stage production is an "actor", even the singer. A different disambiguation should be used in my opinion. --Gonnym (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Agree, sub-pages should carry the same title. My support for middle name disambiguation (very standard real world natural disambiguation) depends on it being accepted for the parent page.

Importantly, the current is not ok. Something has to be done. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, at least for now. Only the actress has a significant enough "screen and stage" career to warrant a separate article about that. Should the singers "screen and stage" career become significant enough to warrant such an article for her (which I admit is not unlikely), then we would have a disambiguity to resolve. But then we would have to reconsider the current disambiguators (actress and singer) as well, though I strongly oppose disambiguating by middle name when that's not part of a COMMONNAME for the subject in question. --В²C ☎ 23:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC) --В²C ☎ 23:30, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose – The other Michelle Williams has no such page, so there is ZERO need for clunky disambiguation. We disambiguate only when there are identically titled articles. There's absolutely no requirement for this page to have disambiguation simply because the subject's main article needs it. Disambiguation should be a last resort. —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:35, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...For the sake of
    WP:TITLECON: The result of Talk:Film industry in Georgia (U.S. state)#Requested move 22 November 2019 contradicts this statement. Steel1943 (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Except...
      WP:OTHERSTUFF. Station1 was the only one who got it right there. That really needs to be revisited. Film industry in Georgia is not a U.S. state, as the current title absurdly suggests. There is no article about the film industry in the nation of Georgia, so there was no need to disambiguate. That was a really bad decision. Going on my list, User:Born2cycle#Bad RM decisions. --В²C ☎ 01:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • IMO,
        WP:OTHERSTUFF since an encyclopedia should have consistent article titles. Steel1943 (talk) 01:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • I don't disagree in general, but the practice of using a disambiguated title in a sub-title verbatim is too rare for TITLECON to apply. That's why OTHERSTUFF applies to the one (dubious) example provided here. --В²C ☎ 02:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Joeyconnick. Station1 (talk) 06:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose preemptive disambiguation. Worst-case scenario: just add a hatnote to Michelle Williams (singer)#Filmography (which is another garbage, incorrectly-formatted "Filmography" table anyway), though I lean against even doing that... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • While her TV appearances do seem not notable, her stage performances include 3 Broadway musicals. That's pretty notable. --Gonnym (talk) 17:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Definitely, but there is not enough to warrant a separate "on screen and stage" for the one primarily known as a singer, so there is no conflict to resolve with disambiguation. For another example, consider The Paris News. By the convention suggested by this proposal that article would be at The Paris, Texas News. Or perhaps since that's so obviously wrong, The Paris (Texas) News, which is only slightly better, and about as bad as the proposed title in this case. But we don't do either because there is no other article with the title The Paris News. Similarly here where there is no other Michelle Williams on the screen and stage article. --В²C ☎ 17:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose any notion of plunking a parenthetical term into the middle of any title. This goes against the whole purpose of both
  prepositional phrase. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose per Gonnym, В²C, Joeyconnick, Station1, IJBall and Sangdeboeuf. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  ...@Roman Spinner: Just FYI, Gonnym did not oppose the request, even though the word "oppose" is in their comment. Steel1943 (talk) 15:51, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I appreciate the correction and have stricken Gonnym's name from my above list of "Oppose" votes. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:32, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a

talk page or in a move review

. No further edits should be made to this section.