Talk:Bumps & Bruises

Requested move 24 August 2019

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. Consensus is to revert to the prior status quo. And there is currently no need for a dab page, as the other album can be linked through hatnote per WP:TWODABS  — Amakuru (talk) 10:34, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

---

Bumps & Bruises (Ugly God album) → Bumps & Bruises – This article was recently moved to its current title and a disambiguation page was created at Bumps & Bruises, but the reasoning behind the move is unclear to me. Since we don't have an article for the other item on the disambiguation page, this seems like it would be better handled with a hatnote than with a disambiguation page. Eureka Lott 18:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 22:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

• Maybe create Bumps & Bruises (Joe Tex album) article? the Joe Tex album was only 108 this is 46, but can't see that there's much in it. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
• Endorse current naming the move was valid to create a disambiguation between two pages dealing with subjects with the same title (the Joe Tex album and Bumps & Bruises (Ugly God album)). Reverting the move would grant the Ugly God album primary topic status for which I see no justification. Polyamorph (talk) 08:48, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support. If the Joe Tex album is indeed non-notable, there's no reason for a roadblock here. Nohomersryan (talk) 23:45, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

The Joe Tex album is equally notable as the Ugly God album.Polyamorph (talk) 07:05, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Or, perhaps, equally lacking in notability. Narky Blert (talk) 07:45, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support (unless Bumps & Bruises (Joe Tex album) is created), if notable, then create a micro stub, nobody is preventing you from doing that. This is a pointless page as hatnotes exist. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 19:19, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
• Support. Until there is an article for the Joe Tex album a hatnote is more than sufficient while a dab page is somewhat redundant. PC78 (talk) 23:15, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
• Comment. This reminds of a similar RM, relating to a song, in which I commented. After the RM had been closed, I put the song up for WP:AFD; the consensus was clear; and a week later, the article was deleted.

I looked at the citations in this article. One is an interview; one is promotional; and one is a Twitter post. Only the pitchfork.com article is anything resembling WP:RS. (It is clearly independent: "Ugly God raps over his own production for the project’s 14 tracks, which makes the whole thing feel a lot longer than it is. The music is tinny and piecemeal and the raps are dull and repetitive in the worst possible way".) I cannot see how this article passes WP:NALBUM. Narky Blert (talk) 07:55, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Notability is determined by sources that exist though, not merely those cited in the article. You could AfD it if you wish, but it's really a side issue. PC78 (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2019 (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.