Talk:Intimacy (disambiguation)

Requested move 31 January 2016

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: No move. Cúchullain ^t/c 16:00, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Intimacy (disambiguation) → Intimacy – per WP:CONCISE. See the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 31#Intimacy; although I dislike the RM and the RfD going on at the same time, the alternative is worse because it suggests a kinda attempt to circumvent consensus-gathering. Si Trew (talk) 05:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC) Si Trew (talk) 05:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the current set up is that Intimacy is an umbrella page "Intimate relationship that involves physical or emotional intimacy" which covers two sub-articles Physical intimacy and Emotional intimacy. That's as it should be. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:03, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per In ictu oculi – there is no other topic on this page that would serve as primary topic better than "Intimate relationship", so "Intimacy" should continue to redirect to that article, and this page should continue to show the qualifier, "disambiguation". Be prosperous! Paine 16:58, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't say any other page should be primary. Said it should be DABbed. Intimacy is not a an umbrella page, it's a redirect; you're saying that you have an "umbrella page" because neither Physical intimacy and Emotional intimacy are primary, but that is what a DAB is for. Si Trew (talk) 05:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Si, I didn't say that you claimed that any other page should be primary. What I did say was that no other link on the dab page could serve as the primary topic nearly as well as Intimate relationship, which is actually the umbrella page. The Intimacy redirect targets that umbrella page as the primary topic of "intimacy". So I really don't see why you think the redirect should be the dab page, which implies no primary topic, rather than being representative of the obvious primary topic, "intimate relationship". In my humble opinion, it would be better to move the redirect to the primary-topic page than it would be to move it to the dab page. But that's not really necessary either – it's what a redirect is for. Paine 15:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per Paine Ellsworth's arguments. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:47, 8 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.