Talk:Dub music

Etymology

In the main article "dub" is identified as an abbreviation of "double" which, of course, it is not. Since this is my first visit (wanted to see if this weekend's 10th. anniversary party at Elbo Room was mentioned) I don't know how/where to insert the fact that "dub" is an abbreviation for "dubbing", as in "overdubbing"

Dub poetry

Is dub poetry a big enough topic to have it's own page, or would a discussion fit better here? Zeimusu 14:08, 2004 Jun 28 (UTC)

Behold the a-answer Htaccess

New Zealand

Surprised not to see New Zealand featured in this article. Dub and reggae is huge part of their culture.

Requested move 21 October 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Participants have established that this form is standard on Wikipedia and used in sources. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

---

Dub (music) → Dub music – This is the standard title format for music genre articles (see e.g. pop music or rock music); the current format instead indicates that dub is a feature of music, such as a specific technique or sound (see e.g. screaming (music) or programming (music)). --MASHAUNIX 14:15, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

• Support per nom's sound analysis. --Cavarrone 16:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose because it's always referred to simply as 'dub', not 'dub music'. --Michig (talk) 20:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
• Comment generally just called dub, dub reggae even, will rarely hear the expression 'dub music' in fan discourse, but, some notable writing on the subject does use the term throughout, see Dub: Soundscapes and Shattered Songs in Jamaican Reggae for example. Semitransgenic _talk. 22:19, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

---

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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

I thought the idea was to establish consensus? It certainly wasn't established here. --Michig (talk) 18:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Two editors explicitly supported the move, with sound arguments, and a third offered evidence that the proposed title is in use in sources, which countered the one opposing argument. Consensus was established.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Only four editors contributed, two of which state that 'dub music' is not the common name for the topic. --Michig (talk) 19:31, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

it doesn't look like a strong consensus, which is required to move a long standing article with a stable title, I commented because ultimately either would work, both are used. Technically, dub is also a feature of the music, that's the origin of the style, a dub version of a recorded work, so dub (music) is not too far of the mark. Semitransgenic _talk. 21:07, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I'll try to explain my reasoning a bit more. Move requests aren't votes; arguments, evidence and policy are what carry weight. I found the consensus here sufficient to move the article, especially considering that the supporters presented compelling arguments and the only opposing argument was effectively countered. The proposed title fits WP:AT policy: natural disambiguation is generally preferable to a title with a parentheses where available, even if it's less common, and the evidence presented here shows that "dub music" is in use in the sources. It was not a particularly strong local consensus, but a rough consensus supported by relevant policy is enough. If I thought leaving the discussion going longer could have found a different result I might have relisted, but I just don't see that happening.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:08, 1 November 2015 (UTC)