Talk:Tical (unit)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Requested move 8 September 2021

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) Vpab15 (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


TicalTical (unit) – Given the minimal number of pageviews this article gets, compared to the 1994 Method Man album, it cannot be considered primary. Per WP:NOPRIMARY, Tical should be a disambiguation page. 162 etc. (talk) 03:44, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: If moved, please let it be done by an admin who can do a history split and move only the versions since August 2021, restoring the disambiguation page before that. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:04, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This page was converted to an article just a month ago, so page views beyond that wouldn't tell much (though views during the past month still shows significant difference). Not sure if this counts as WP:RECENTISM, as the album was released over twenty years ago, but practically all Google Books search results are about the unit of weight/currency. Both the Thai baht and Cambodian tical are derived from the unit, so the article serves as a WP:CONCEPTDAB for both of them, but not the album. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:04, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Right, my interpretation is that Tical (unit) wins on long-term notability, and Tical (album) wins on pageviews; hence neither is primary. 162 etc. (talk) 14:36, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, support. I've given this some thought and the line of reasoning makes sense. I wouldn't mind if this is closed early as unnecessary; if so I'll ask Anthony Appleyard directly to do the split. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:27, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.