Talk:Western film

Requested move 25 April 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

---

Western film (genre) → Western film – no need for 'genre' Bartlea (talk) 15:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). ButlerBlog (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose - More discussion is needed. The inclusion of (genre) is a disambiguation of context. It identifies we are speaking of films that are Western (genre) and not simply those of "Western Civilization" (i.e. European or American, as film is a global medium). This disambiguation is consistent with other pages within the Western genre (such as the general genre page Western (genre) or in categories such as Category:Western (genre) films). ButlerBlog (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

  Since there is no other relevant Wikipedia article that 'Western film' could potentially refer to, there is no requirement for disambiguation. When I read Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Deciding to disambiguate: "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead." Bartlea (talk) 16:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

  You are correct that it is not required explicitly, but requirements shouldn't be read with the implicit assumption that the inverse is also a requirement. What I mean by that is that the requirement is when disambiguation is necessary; it does not cover disambiguation in instances where it is not required and should be assumed to mean that if it's not required, it should not be done. And required or otherwise, it would be subject to consensus. (FTR, this is a fairly new article and when published, it was reviewed for standards by new page patrol). ButlerBlog (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

• I'd support an alternative move to Western (film genre) because it makes it much clearer what the article is about. --Killuminator (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

  @Butlerblog I support it too, did not thought about this option. Bartlea (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

  Honestly, I'd probably be more inclined to support the original suggestion, simply because this is too close to Western (genre), the page it was split from. That page originally more on film specifically, but it expanded to include other media and subgenres over time and became quite muddled. All of the primary sub-media have since been split to a separate articles - this was the last one remaining. While my opposition is that the current article is not inconsistent within Westerns, Western film is not necessarily inconsistent with other genre articles. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

  If the title requires disambiguation then the current formalism (i.e. Western film (genre)) is consistent with Horror film, Comedy film etc. Betty Logan (talk) 22:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Horror film and comedy film don't create any ambiguities. Western can read as either 'the wild west' or 'the western world' as a cultural and geographic grouping of countries. Disambiguation of a genre and region of origin. --Killuminator (talk) 22:18, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

    Western film (genre) is no more ambiguous than Western (film genre), so renaming it as such makes no sense. If you are going to disambiguate Western film then the correct disambiguation term is Western film (genre) because it is part of a series i.e. Comedy film, Horror film, Action film etc. Betty Logan (talk) 23:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

• Support Western film is a redirect. Obvious WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Regardless of whether the article is moved, I think western film should be history merged into it for historical continuity reasons. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
• Support per Zxcvbnm. The genre would appear to be the primary topic, a quick google confirms this. There may be other interpretations (such as List of historical films set in Near Eastern and Western civilization or in the vein of Western art) but they are nowhere near as prevalent as the genre. Betty Logan (talk) 22:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nomination, ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ and Betty Logan. Among the 280 entries listed under Category:Film genres, the only ones currently using the parenthetical qualifier "(genre)" are Bomba (genre), Northern (genre), Quinqui (film genre) and Western film (genre). Those four main title headers should be moved to Bomba film, Northern film, Quinqui film and Western film, respectively. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

  Northern (genre) is a genre article, not a film article. ButlerBlog (talk) 23:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate the correction. Although Northern (genre) appears among the listings under Category:Film genres due to its section Northern (genre)#Film, Wikipedia does not have a separate article for Northern film and the entry for Northern (genre) is thus akin to the all-inclusive entry for Western (genre) which likewise contains the section Western (genre)#Film, but is not listed under Category:Film genres due to the existence of the standalone entry for Western film. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:16, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Completely unnecessary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Disambiguator is unnecessary and adds very little anyway. –CWenger (^ • @) 00:17, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Recent lead updates

Recent updates to the lead were actually really good in terms of content and writing. However, two key problems - first, it's not summarizing what's already in the article (which is the purpose of the lead), and second, it's entirely uncited, making it original research (see WP:NOR). Anything covered in the lead should be covered in the article in more detail. If it's cited in the body, that's fine, but if not, it must be cited in the lead. ButlerBlog (talk) 16:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)