The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: No move. Ucucha 16:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Estonian Song Festival → Estonian Song Celebration — Relisted. The claims by participants in this discussion about the most common English name for this event contradict each other; could people please review their votes in light of the new sources? Ucucha 03:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is more accurate name used on the offical website. Though something else related to dance celebrations and youth song and dance celebrations have been suggested above as well, the current state of this article, besides dance celebrations being mentioned in last sentece, still represents only song celebrations. 88.196.241.249 (talk) 15:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me first point out the implications behind a simple redirect. It would also mean changing the links to Estonian Song Festival, Song Festival, Tallinn Song Festival Grounds and probably more. Hence the reason for the redirect would have to overweigh the resulting work. First of all, it is unclear to me as a non-native English speaker, why is 'song celebration' a more accurate term for the event. Wikiarticles on similar events Eisteddfod, Mod and Kan ar Bobl discuss 'song festivals' whereas the term 'celebration' occurs in none of them. Second, the fact that the Estonian Song and Dance Celebration Foundation uses the term 'celebration' is indeed relevant but it is poor evidence for it being more accurate. It merely says that for an unknown reason the foundation is promoting an alternative name for the event. However, the song event under question is not the property of the foundation but belongs to the whole human kind (as confirmed by its inclusion in the list of UNESCO World Heritage). Therefore, the name of the event is up to the English-speaking community to decide. A Google search of "Estonian Song Celebration" gives 49,100 matches against the 170,000 matches for "Estonian Song Festival" so let us see some evidence for the 'song celebration'. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 13:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the documentary film The Singing Revolution has also translated laulupidu as Song Festival. See here.--H2ppyme (talk) 14:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Since that's what all of the existing references seem to use (in English, at least. Not sure about the Estonian ref). As for the commentary about "all the work involved", please see Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken, in relation to the mistaken belief that many other things would need to be changed. WP:MOVE may also be of interest to those of you involved in building this article.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 03:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Re: "all of the existing references": sadly, the opposite is true. Of the five cited references, two use the term celebration. Regarding the resulting work, it is not at all about the links or redirects but the term used in tens of articles which is currently song festival and which would have to be changed to song celebration. Therefore I once again urge editors to justify the need for the move before making it. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 19:03, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  I want to again point out the link I provided earlier to WP:NOTBROKEN. Please read it. The statements your making about "the term used in tens of articles" is flat out wrongheaded, and I'm really concerned that either yourself or someone else reading this will subsequently start running around changing things elsewhere in the mistaken belief that things are being "fixed". As for the actual issue at hand, see below.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 21:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Official home page uses Song and Dance Celebration and Song Celebration [1]. On the other hand, majority of the English sources (e.g. newspapers, travel guides and such) seem to be using Song Festival ([2], [3], [4], [5], [6] etc). Even the official Tallinn Song Festival Grounds page uses Song Festivals [7].

  According to Google, Song Festival seems to be far more used, even in books and scientific articles (and it does roll off tongue much better than rather awkward "Song Celebrations"). On the other hand, Celebrations is what the official page has. So, according to the WP:COMMONNAME we should keep it under current name, however, create the appropriate redirects if they don't exist and mention that the official English name differs from the common name.

  Also, once again, I would like to urge editors to improve this article to Good Article status. This is a high-profile article - and one that is almost certainly used by media to get information about the event. There are plenty of sources available in both Estonian and English, so sourcing should not be a problem.

  --Sander Säde 08:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  This analysis makes perfect sense to me. I suspect that there's a translation component to this, which is probably why the "native English" general audience sources (the mentioned newspapers, web sites, travel guides, etc...) tend to use Song Festival (which can be considered to be a more "grammatically correct" phrase then Song Celebration would be, to many native English speakers). I want to point out that my position above is based on the actual article content at the time, which suggested to me that this is a reasonable request. Since it appears that those of you who are more familiar with the subject disagree I'd like to seriously suggest that you get to work improving the article. These discussions shouldn't be very contentious, since the article content really ought to lead most reasonable editors to an appropriate decision.
  — V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 21:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "those of you who are more familiar with the subject disagree" - not true. I consider myself very familiar with the subject, having performed at four Song Festivals and keenly followed more. I do not see the move justified. --Jaan Pärn (talk) 07:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, that's what I said...
— V = I * R (talk to Ohms law) 08:45, 26 January 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.