Talk:Tout le monde en parle (French talk show)

Requested move 23 October 2018

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 as proposed. There's a clear consensus that the French show isn't the primary topic and should be moved. There's a rough consensus for the proposed title vs the (France) option. There's no consensus that the Canadian show is the primary topic in this discussion; if desired, another RM can be started at a later date making that case. For now, Tout le monde en parle will be a dab page. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:33, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

---

• Tout le monde en parle → Tout le monde en parle (French talk show)
• Tout le monde en parle (Quebec) → Tout le monde en parle (Canadian talk show)

– According to page views, this is basically a WP:NOPRIMARY situation, so both articles need to be disambiguated from each other (along with the use of hatnotes). Second, Tout le monde en parle (Quebec) is just incorrectly disambiguated as per WP:NCTV, and needs to be moved to correct disambiguation, which is Tout le monde en parle (Canadian talk show). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:50, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

• Support per nom and WP:NCTV. --Gonnym (talk) 16:16, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
• Support In ictu oculi (talk) 08:35, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

In regard to below comment by 65.94, do not see that (French ) could be misunderstood given that the title itself is clearly in French and the other option would not be a language. As per WP:NOPRIMARY, both page views and GBooks show the two shows at 50/50, so move Tout le monde en parle (disambiguation) into baseline, as on fr.wp. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

• Partial support / Oppose as proposed Tout le monde en parle should move to Tout le monde en parle (France), because both talk shows are French-language talk shows. The Quebec title can use either disambiguator, but the show from France is inherently confused when using the "French" disambiguator. Yes, clearly the show from France needs to be renamed. -- 65.94.42.18 (talk) 04:01, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

You are incorrect – as per WP:NCTV, the above proposal is correct, and yours is incorrect: we don't disambiguate by country alone under WP:NCTV. This has nothing to do with "language" and everything to do with the country. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:33, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

In this particular case, NCTV guideline fails WP:PRECISE policy; it recommends an ambiguous name, and thus is not a valid name for the article. The policy takes priority over the guideline per WP:POLICY. Tout le monde en parle (France talk show) would be fine though. "(French talk show)" would need to point to the disambiguation page -- 65.94.42.18 (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Both articles already have hatnotes: with that, there is no reason not to follow NCTV and use "French game show" – the very few people that somehow are looking for the French-language Canadian version will quickly get there with the hatnote, so there's no reason to invoke a "special exception" the disambiguation titling here... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:49, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

The controlling policy is WP:PRECISE part of WP:Article titles. In this case WP:NCTV contravenes the most basic naming policy, so cannot be applied in this case "(French talk show)" since both talk shows are in French (not Swahili, or Hindi). WP:POLICY indicates that policies such as WP:AT override guidelines like NCTV in cases of conflict. Wikipedia-wide global standards are more central than local standards of one particular topic area, since global standards apply to all topic areas. The NCTV guideline fails to take into account language issues in disambiguation, recommending an ambiguous title. Rather, the "special exception" would be to make an ambiguous title following NCTV, where the global policy does not recommend making ambiguous names as exceptions to PRECISE unambigous naming. "French" is ambiguous in this case, so the special exception NCTV recommends to contravene PRECISE should not be followed. -- 65.94.42.18 (talk) 04:42, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

FTR, I have no objection to creating a redirect at Tout le monde en parle (France talk show) – that is an entirely reasonable suggestion/request. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes, if it isn't moved there, a redirect should be created from this and "(France)" as well. (and for the other, "(Canada)" and "(Quebec talk show)" redirects should also be created) -- 65.94.42.18 (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

The IP has a point, both the Canadian and French talk shows can be Tout le monde en parle (French talk show). Flooded with them hundreds 13:41, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

• Support alternative.

  • Tout le monde en parle → Tout le monde en parle (France)
  • Tout le monde en parle (Quebec) → Tout le monde en parle

  By moving Tout le monde en parle to Tout le monde en parle (French talk show) as proposed, the basename remains a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to this article, so what's the point? I don't see the creation of a two entry dab page in the proposal (not that I would support that). However, per WP:2DABPRIMARY, the threshold should be low for deciding primary topic here, and the page view counts indicate the Quebec one is the primary topic by a significant margin (based on 20 average daily page views vs 13 for the France one). So I support moving the France one to a disambiguated title, though I agree with others that (France) is the better (WP:PRECISE) disambiguator here. Then the primary topic Quebec article can be moved to the basename. --В²C ☎ 23:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

• Your proposal is still wrong: it should be Tout le monde en parle → Tout le monde en parle (French talk show). You can try to ignore WP:NCTV all you like on these RM's, but it's still the controlling naming convention guideline, and should be followed. You have offered no subtantive policy-based reason why it should not. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:06, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
  • You can’t expect the guidelines to account for every case. ‘’French talk show’’ would be a reasonable disambiguator if, you know, the other use wasn’t arguably a ‘’French talk show’’ as well. You shouldn’t have to be an NCTV wonk to understand our titles, which understanding that “French talk show” means “from France” and not “in the French language” requires. And policy we can’t ignore at WP:AT requires us to use a WP:PRECISE title for non-PRIMARY articles regardless what the NCTV mere ‘’guideline’’ says. Disambiguating with “French talk show” doesn’t meet the policy requirement. —В²C ☎ 07:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

• I'd like to comment and make it clear that I oppose this whole train of thought. First of all, the page views show that there is clearly no primary topic. Continuing on from that, I find it ridiculous that an adaptation would get primary over the original source. And lastly, "(France)" is just not an accepted disambiguation and there is no need for exceptions here. Will a reader be confused? Maybe, but if they are writing in the search box the name and one comes out as "Tout le monde en parle (French talk show)" and the other "Tout le monde en parle (Canadian talk show)", they wont be. Also, what you are asking for is not an exception to a rare case, but to every show from Quebec. That is an open-ended exception, which should not be legitimized in a discussion over an obscure article. --Gonnym (talk) 08:08, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

• Gonnym how do "the page views show that there is clearly no primary topic"? I showed we're getting a 60/40 distribution favoring the Canada one over the France one, not surprisingly, in an English encyclopedia. I mean, English speakers are generally more likely to look for a show from Canada than one from France, and that won't be affected by which one was created/produced first. 60/40 is enough to establish a primary topic, especially in a two dabs situations per WP:2DABPRIMARY. Why send 100% to a page they are not seeking (the dab page) when we can send them to the page 60% are seeking and where the 40% minority remains just one click from the page they seeking, same as they would had they been sent to the dab page? And this does not affect every show from Quebec, just those that must be disambiguated from shows with the same name that are from France. If "(U.S. TV show)" is an acceptable disambiguator (rather than "(American TV show)"), why not "(France TV show)"? Or, again, just "(France)" seems enough to me. --В²C ☎ 21:25, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

As I've said elsewhere, a 60/40 split is nowhere near enough to be considered a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC under its criteria #1 (e.g. see: "...highly likely—much more likely...". It probably needs to be more like 90/10, and 95/5 or 98/2 is a much better/safer bet. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:36, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Also WP:2DABPRIMARY, an essay so irrelevant in any discussion. U.S. is valid since it appears in List of adjectival and demonymic forms for countries and nations under "Adjectivals", while "France" does not. --Gonnym (talk) 07:37, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@IJBall: can we reformat or box this new "alternative" to get the RM back on WP:NCTV track? It's clear that the guideline covers this case and the suggestion to depart from the guideline doesn't need a separate alternative RM set up inside it. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:40, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi: I trust our WP:RM closers to properly weigh the strength of arguments made in these discussions, and "collapsing" this off-shot discussion would be inappropriate in this case because, while several of us don't agree with the proposal being made, it's not "off-topic". Perhaps this RM gets relisted as a result. But I believe the ultimate "move" outcome will be the correct one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay, then anyway, back to the original proposal, continue to Support. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

---

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.