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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved with WP:HISTMERGE. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:25, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Supercapitalism (concept) → Supercapitalism – This is at best a WP:ONEOTHER situation and the other topic is already disambiguated using its subtitle. DAB page isn't needed and can be replaced by a hatnote. -- Netoholic @ 20:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE TO CLOSER: The current DAB page has relevant edit history up thru April 2009 (split due to a WP:CUTPASTE) which should be merged back to the article. -- Netoholic @ 20:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. I have a problem with this type of move request, so I call wbm1058 to look this over before it is closed. The target title, which names a dab page that has two entries, is not a redirect. It is a page with content and so gets listed at WP:RM in the Possibly incomplete requests subsection. If a request like this is granted, then the target title went the entire period of the request with no notice of any kind at the top of its page. No RM notice, no notice of proposed deletion, nothing. Then it just gets deleted so an article can be moved to that title. Shouldn't the target title be proposed for deletion, either SD, PROD or AfD, before any requested move is even opened?

To be clear, I think this move request does have merit, because while I think that the proposer is wrong about "the other topic is already disambiguated using its subtitle", because the book can still be referred to as simply "Supercapitalism" in the same manner that the "Mississippi River" can be referred to as simply the "Mississippi", Reich's book (2007) seems to be about a more modern supercapitalism. So the "concept" from 1914 (coined by Mussolini, c. 1933) does have long-term significance over the book and is the primary topic. And the book gets fewer page views, as well. I have no doubt that this move request will be granted; however, I think it's very wrong to delete a page – to make way for a page move – that has not been tagged with some kind of deletion notice first. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 21:35, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.