Talk:Invincible (Michael Jackson album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Invincible (Michael Jackson album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

Invincible (Michael Jackson album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 20, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
July 9, 2010	Good topic candidate	Promoted
March 23, 2021	Good topic removal candidate	Demoted

Current status: Good article

Michael Jackson Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michael Jackson, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Michael Jackson 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.Michael JacksonWikipedia:WikiProject Michael JacksonTemplate:WikiProject Michael JacksonMichael Jackson
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Invincible (Michael Jackson album). Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Invincible (Michael Jackson album) at the Reference desk.

The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to Michael Jackson, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Requested move 20 February 2025

It has been proposed in this section that Invincible (Michael Jackson album) be renamed and moved to Invincible (album).

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Invincible (Michael Jackson album) → Invincible (album) – This is the primary topic by far, per WP:PDAB, as it generates overwhelmingly five times more results than the other four subjects of the same name (Invincible (Five album), Invincible (Lemar album), Invincible (Two Steps from Hell album), Invincible (Skillet album)) combined. TheWikiholic (talk) 04:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 09:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the introduction of unnecessary ambiguity. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:11, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, when most people think of the Invincible album naturally they think of Michael Jackson's. This isn't like it will get mixed up with the Television show either so there's no conflict Never17 (talk) 01:16, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There clearly is a conflict. This move request passing would be choosing to willfully ignore it. Which we sometimes do in similar cases, but we should be clear about what it is that we are doing. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would you propose? Never17 (talk) 04:10, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doing nothing. I don't see any problem with the current situation. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Invincible (Michael Jackson album) has garnered 72,456 views in the last 90 days, whereas Invincible (Skillet album) has got 4,494 views, Invincible (Two Steps from Hell album) 4,405 views, Invincible (Five album) 4,377 views, and Invincible (Lemar album) 283 views in comparison. This proves the article is the primary topic among albums and does not need further disambiguation by adding "Michael Jackson album". TheWikiholic (talk) 01:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support - clear primary topic and inline with WP:INCDAB MraClean (talk) 19:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Albums and WikiProject Michael Jackson have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 09:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Incomplete disambiguation is never a good idea. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:20, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. It vastly surpasses the other results and more cultural significance Mr Boar1 (talk) 03:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I have no issue in general with partial disambiguation (and I honestly think the other opposers shoot themselves in the foot when they press a rejected categorical argument rather than considering things case by case), but in this instance I don't think the standard is met: five-to-one would certainly make for a primary topic under normal circumstances, but I'm not convinced it meets the higher threshold that WP:INCDAB establishes. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:44, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Atleast 6 albums Earthling (album), Buffalo Springfield (album),Born This Way (album),Resolve (album),Set You Free (album), Tattoos (album) have partial DABs with ratios of 4:1, 4:1, 4:1, and 3:1, 3:1, 3:1, respectively mostly against two and three of similar titles combined. This article's page ratio is 5:1, combined with five other album titles. And I think it meets the highest threshold required by WP:INCDAB." TheWikiholic (talk) 10:43, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any of those have been to RM (except for one back before it was fully ambiguous). If the ratios are that low, I'd certainly support moving them, and I suspect others would too. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 10:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Pppery and Necrothesp. Frost 07:03, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]