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. We have consensus that a WP:CONCEPTDAB at the base name is preferable. Cúchullain ^t/c 13:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Knight Rider (franchise) → Knight Rider – This is the obvious target for people searching for information about "Knight Rider". A disambiguation at the base title is not warranted, it should have the non-disambiguated spot and the disambiguation be at Knight Rider (disambiguation) with a hatnote. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 06:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose this malformed primarytopic grab proposal. You should really do a multi-move proposal, and ideally also mention it on the talk pages of all the other articles on the affect disambig page, to get a fair hearing. Dicklyon (talk) 01:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see how it's worth it to spend time marking up other articles when the vast majority of the articles in the disambiguation are just other Knight Rider shows, or other "sounds alike" names that are not spelled the same way. It's not really unfair to anyone, the disambiguation is just a list of Knight Rider media and shouldn't have been there to begin with._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 21:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC/WP:CONCEPTDAB. Readers are most likely to be searching for one or more constituents of the current Knight Rider (franchise) article which is already a WP:CONCEPTDAB-like article. I'm not sure what the problem with the request is; it sets out two complementary proposed moves. —  AjaxSmack  01:22, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose and rethink. The base name should refer to the character after whom the franchise and the various works are named, as do the articles on the prototypical superheroes Superman (1933) and Batman (1939). It's a little more complicated as there are multiple characters who are Knight Riders in the same story arc, but Batman also refers to several characters, and the same principle should apply. Andrewa (talk) 04:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think this line of thought applies here as there is no character named "Knight Rider". That phrase is only used in the title of the shows. --Netoholic @ 12:16, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per AjaxSmack. All items on the dab page are parts of the franchise, and it serves the WP:CONCEPTDAB purpose (although it ought to be longer and better summarize its concept and history, and spend a bit more material about parts of the franchise and spin-offs). A lot of material should be merged from Knight Rider (1982 TV series), where it's arguably off-topic, as it ended in 1986. But article's shortcomings should not be a blocking for proper naming of the article. No such user (talk) 10:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:CONCEPTDAB, and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television)#Series franchise overview of franchise should occupy primary title. --Netoholic @ 12:35, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, the franchise is the clear primary topic of the term, and virtually every actually matching topic on the page is merely a subtopic of this topic. bd2412 T 12:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From above: I don't think this line of thought applies here as there is no character named "Knight Rider". That phrase is only used in the title of the shows. [1]

Borderline perhaps... there are many characters who are examples of a Knight Rider (note capitalisation... knight rider isn't right). There are several characters by the name of Batman, but in that case (unarguably I think) the characters are the primary topic. I would make the base name an article on the characters after which all else is named, but if that's as much a minority view as it appears, of course we go with the (only slightly rough) consensus. Andrewa (talk) 22:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, I can only repeat what I said above, but maybe with more emphasis - there are no characters named/titled/referred to as Knight Rider. The lead characters name was Michael Long, but he later took the name Michael Knight. He never went by the pseudonym "Knight Rider". He was never "a Knight Rider". That phrase was only used as the title of the TV series. Your Batman analogy is completely irrelevant here. -- Netoholic @ 07:24, 27 September 2017 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.