Talk:Sigala

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. There were compelling arguments on both sides, but consensus is that this is the

• Support. The only other use of Sigala on WP is the Estonian village,
  WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --В²C ☎ 23:51, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support - Per
  WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. No reason to include "musician" in page name. Meatsgains (talk) 04:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment the nominator moved the village and then redirected the redirect here last month, so this is in effect a multimove nomination. The nominator did not provide a proper rationale for usurping the village. -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 06:39, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment if this is the PTOPIC, the disambiguation page can be moved to Sigala (disambiguation) -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 06:48, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - not a fan, but the fact that I have heard of the musician means they must be at least somewhat relevant. All of the over Sigalas will sit comfortably on the dab page.  Mr.choppers | ✎  08:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose it has only redirected to the musician since 7 December 2015‎ Unreal7 moved page Sigala to Sigala, Hiiu County). Of the many things on the dab and on en.wp the standard "Sigala is" and "Sigala was" GBook tests don't pick up the London-based tropical house DJ and producer from Norfolk as the overwhelming meaning. If anything the beach town in Egypt would be the most popular hit. User:Meatsgains User:Mr.choppers were you aware of the Buddhist boy Sigala, our Buddhism article on the Sigala discourse, and all the Google Books refs to that? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:37, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While we're on this subject, is the Norfolk DJ named after the Buddhist boy Sigala from the Sigala Homily? It seems an odd name to have picked at random. Perhaps there's a blog source on how he found his name? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:46, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of topics as relevant to WP title decisions is established by linking to the respective articles. I see no such links in any of your commentary. Just saying. If you think something has been overlooked, then start the articles and link to them so we have relative page views to consider in, say, 6 months. Thank you. --В²C ☎ 17:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sigala is not a singer. In your desperation to ignore the blatant fact that this is the primary topic and just instantly type "oppose", you appear to have forgotten to read. Unreal7 (talk) 22:43, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Typo that's all, he is a tropical house DJ and producer from Norfolk. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:18, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please correct me if I'm mistaken,

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC; all titles with ambiguous names (ambiguous with uses whether or not they have articles on WP) should be disambiguated to ensure there can never be any question as to which topic a given title refers. Even if your position is not quite that extreme, it is so contrary to community consensus and longstanding (as in forever) practice on WP, it's difficult, at least for me, to take seriously. --В²C ☎ 20:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

That fact that you've asked a question bolding your own view doesn't indicate well for your ability to receive the answer to your question, however FWIW no. Of course not. In fact I believe that Sigala should be

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC by looking at Google Books. He was notable enough for the Norfolk DJ to name himself after him and Buddha's discourse with Sigala is notable for a real encyclopaedia. I just don't believe that trivial recent media products should displace serious encyclopaedic subjects. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for the correction. Of course that leaves unknown what your position on these issues actually is. That aside, how do you reconcile saying, "I believe that Sigala should be

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC" and you opposing this proposal? I can't make sense of that. --В²C ☎ 21:20, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

When Iio says "Sigala", he means the Buddhist character. However, this very minor person who appears once in a tale doesn't have his own article, so I don't think it is anywhere near important enough.  Mr.choppers | ✎  22:45, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Right. Agreed. So Iio finally concedes there is a primary topic in a case where there is only a SNOW chance of consensus agreement on that, and that's supposed to serve as evidence that he does not totally dismiss PRIMARYTOPIC. In ictu oculi, have you ever formally supported any proposal for a topic to be declared a primary topic (and it's title determined accordingly), or any topic retain its primary topic status (and base name title)? Just trying to get your position on this title in proper perspective... --В²C ☎ 23:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

comment - Sigala, the village in Egypt, currently doesn't even have an entry. Nor does the prostrate young Sigala, since the article on the discourse has another title. Sigala the middling DJ somehow has millions of fans and is therefore the primary topic.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:25, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sigala (Buddhism) and all others combined? A DJ will certainly pass one requirement, what about the second? In ictu oculi (talk) 09:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Since "

Sigalovada Sutta, the permanence of Sigala the flash-in-the-pan DJ is irrelevant. I must say, that in today's world where we are quick running out of available letter combinations (hence all of the misspelled business' and artists' names), he picked a good one. Also, apologies for Unreal7's unpleasantness above.  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

• Oppose per In ictu oculi. Omnedon (talk) 03:50, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per primary topic. I do not agree with how Unreal7 intentionally mislead the audience, but the proposed new title is the best option right now.
  (conjugate) 13:53, 3 February 2016 (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.