Talk:Rehash (South Park)

Please do not add mention of pop cultural references, continuity notes, trivia, or who the targets of a given episode's parody are, without accompanying such material with an inline citation of a reliable, published, secondary source. Adding such material without such sources violates Wikipedia's policies pertaining to Verifiability, No Original Research, and Synthesis.

While a primary source (such as the episode itself, or a screencap or clip from it at South Park Studios) is acceptable for material that is merely descriptive, such as the synopsis, it is not enough to cite a primary source for material that constitutes analytic, evaluative or interpretative claims, such as cultural references in works of satire or parody, because in such cases, such claims are being made by the editor. This is called synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is not permitted on Wikipedia, regardless of whether one thinks the meaning of the reference is "obvious". Sources for such claims must be secondary sources in which reliable persons, such as TV critics or reviewers, explicitly mention the reference.

In addition, trivial information that is not salient or relevant enough to be incorporated into the major sections of an article should not be included, per WP:PLOTSUMMARIZE and WP:TRIVIA, and this includes the plot summary. As indicated by WP:TVPLOT, the plot summary is an overview of a work's main events, so avoid any minutiae that is not needed for a reader's understanding of the story's three fundamental elements: plot, characterization and theme. This includes such minutiae as scene-by-scene breakdowns, technical information or detailed explanations of individual gags or lines of dialogue.

If you're new to Wikipedia, please click on the wikilinked policy pages above to familiarize yourself with this site's policies and guidelines.

Requested move 10 December 2014

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: consensus not to move the article to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

---

Rehash (South Park) → REHASH – Moved without discussion based on WP:TM, however, episode titles are (seemingly) exempt from this (note the FA all things, and articles like HOMR and YOLO) Plus, calling the article REHASH works within WP:NATURALallowing us to avoid using a disambiguator. (From reading some past move discussions, I can see there is a guideline on capitals in articles, however, I forget what it's called.) Sources seem to be pretty evenly split on REHASH or Rehash. Nohomersryan (talk) 22:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:ALLCAPS Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:35, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per MOS:CAPS. In addition, "Rehash" already redirects to article Hash table, which has a hatnote. Leave as is. SanAnMan (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't feel that ALLCAPS applies in this situation, since there is some consensus that episode titles don't necessarily follow TM. It is more if we can say it meets WP:DIFFCAPS (the guideline in my proposal that I forgot was called). Nohomersryan (talk) 23:46, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:DIFFCAPS applies to things like Ice Cube and Ice cube, not full capitalization of terms. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:48, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

It most certainly does. "Many such differences involve capitalization, punctuation, or pluralization: MAVEN and Maven;" note the second paragraph which discusses a theoretical situation involving JESUS and Jesus. Nohomersryan (talk) 23:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

• Whatever the outcome of this discussion is, I think the title of the episode in the first sentence should be changed to reflect the page title. I would probably support REHASH (South Park) the most, but I doubt that proposal would meet much agreement. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 23:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree with changing the text. It looks mighty awkward to have "#REHASH" everywhere except for the page title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nohomersryan (talk • contribs) 23:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

• WP:DIFFCAPS also states: "use appropriate disambiguation techniques, such as hatnotes or disambiguation pages to help readers find the article they want." Searching "Rehash" leads to Hash table which has a hatnote, and searching "REHASH" hits a disambiguation to this article. And the technical restrictions prohibit the hashtag in the article, see Willpower (will.i.am album) for similar example. SanAnMan (talk) 00:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
• Also, while I still oppose the move, if consensus is to move, I would support move to REHASH (South Park) to avoid ambiguity. SanAnMan (talk) 00:31, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - should never have been at REHASH, particularly without (South Park). In ictu oculi (talk) 02:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
• Support REHASH (South Park) as Taylor Trescott I don't think that WP:ALLCAPS has any importance. Its just dumb pedantry IMO. Am also unsure of the importance of the Rehash redirect to Hash table GregKaye ✍♪ 05:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose MOS:CAPS , the proposed title isn't even the actual title for the episode anyways. And "REHASH" also has other meanings on Wikipedia List of Internet Relay Chat commands#REHASH -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per MOS and on the basis that all-caps is a very poor form of disambiguation. Also, for what it's worth, "YOLO" is an acronym, so that's not a good example. –Chase (talk / contribs) 05:00, 14 December 2014 (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.