Talk:Vicious circle

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2012; 2014; 2017; 2019;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Business Start‑class High‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Start‑class Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 12 July 2022

The request to rename this article to Vicious circle has been carried out.

If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag.

Virtuous circle and vicious circle → Vicious circle – This archived 2019 comment from User:Nareek suggests that the title should be the other way around, as "vicious circle" is the much more common phrase. I'd go further and suggest moving the article to vicious circle and noting the (presumably later and derived?) variant in bold in the lead, per WP:OTHERNAMES. Lord Belbury (talk) 17:06, 12 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:24, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. "Vicious circle" is a much more widely used phrase, and most of the article (as currently written) is about vicious circles rather than virtuous ones. "Virtuous circle" should definitely remain as a redirect, but I don't think we need it in the title. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 20:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternate move to Vicious cycle, which has about the same usage as "vicious circle", but has been steadily increasing over time while usage of "vicious circle" has been steadily decreasing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:05, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support circle or cycle. Not that I think I'm representative of anyone beyond myself, but I'm not sure I've ever heard or read the term "virtuous circle". Primergrey (talk) 01:28, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there are 2 separate but linked concepts. It would be wrong to give 1 precedence over the other. Wp:Common is not applicable here. Redirects can cater for them. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. What is shared between the two topics is the link to Positive feedback, which has its own article (in fact, Positive feedback loop redirects there instead of here). Given that the content of this article is about the far more common concept of a vicious circle, this seems like an advisable move. I suggest adding a hatnote to Positive feedback for readers interested in the mechanism itself. That article notes that positive feedback is not inherently good or bad; fair enough, but adding "good" to "positive feedback" is not necessarily sufficient justification for having a separate article on virtuous circles. Dekimasuよ! 18:51, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]