Talk:Runes (album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Runes (album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 23:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Runes (album) → Runes (Bury Tomorrow album) – WP:RECENT. This album is not going to be released until May 2014. In Google Books "album Runes" is the name often given to the untitled Led Zeppelin 4th album. Relisted. BDD (talk) 18:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC) In ictu oculi (talk) 11:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Against - That album is given many different however unofficial names, this albums name IS official, I do not see the need in this movement. Also the album is officially titled as "Led Zeppelin 4" so why do we need to rename on the basis that a mere nick name is given to it? - SilentDan297 talk 11:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because the Led Zeppelin album is famous. We're not renaming this album, we'd only simply be allowing readers to see the name of the band. They might like to know the name of the band. In ictu oculi (talk)

Its famous for being Led Zeppelin IV, not as Runes. - SilentDan297 talk 13:45, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Google Books "album Runes" is the name often given to the untitled Led Zeppelin 4th album. Likewise "runes album". In ictu oculi (talk) 01:00, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said however, it is still officially known as Led Zeppelin IV, not as Runes, so I honestly don't see the point, if the album was called Runes I'd completely agree since it would cause confusion, but this albums title is officially Runes, not a mere nick name like Led Zeppelins album. - SilentDan297 talk 00:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, disambiguation page landing point is best for this title; further isn't this article WP:TOOSOON ? -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 05:07, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Against - I am alongside SilentDan on this one, that album is famous for its numbered title, not being called Runes. We can put a template up top to link to Led Zeppelin IV, to avoid any future confusion but I don't think renaming it will change much. I personally have never heard the record be called anything other than their fourth and reading the article it's such a passing mention I doubt anyone else does. Jonjonjohny (talk) 07:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nomination. I have not seen evidence that this album is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over the Led Zeppelin one in common usage, and the Google books review presented by IIO suggests that if anything the Led Zeppelin album is more primary. Also, the "official" name of either album is irrelevant per WP:OFFICIALNAME. It is common usage in sources that we go by. Runes (album) should redirect to Rune (disambiguation). — Amakuru (talk) 11:06, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Questions on how relevant an unreleased album is are better directed towards WP:AFD. Red Slash 03:01, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

List of Runes...[edit]

Is it worth putting a list of runes that are represented by the songs? In this article the frontman Dani explains that every song on this album “...draws its inspiration from each of the runic symbols they are linked to...” and even stated that the latest single 'Man On Fire' draws its inspiration from the runic symbol of man. SilentDan297 talk 16:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]