Tolkien Gateway

Forum:Disambiguation proposal

(Difference between revisions)
 
m (Redlink)
 
(16 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
<!-- Start writing after this line -->
 
<!-- Start writing after this line -->
I noticed [[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] has begun the task of adding a disambig link to characters who have the same name as other characters, awesome. So I went ahead and created [[Template:otherchars|a template]] to make this easier. However I realized a few other wikis might have a better idea. For example people who search for [[Aragorn]], 99% of the time are looking for [[Aragorn II]], so why not make [[Aragorn]] the primary page for it? Then we can have a [[Aragorn (disambiguation)]] page which lists all the Aragorn's. An example of this can be seen on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI Wikipedia's SI article]. SI has other meanings, but the most obvious is written on the SI page, with a link at the top to a disambig page. Now there are some circumstances where out of all the characters, none particularly stand out, in which case we can simply continue with our current method. What do you guys think? --[[User:Hyarion|Hyarion]] 01:32, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
+
I noticed [[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] has begun the task of adding a disambig link to characters who have the same name as other characters, awesome. So I went ahead and created {{redlink|[[Template:otherchars]]}} to make this easier. However I realized a few other wikis might have a better idea. For example people who search for [[Aragorn]], 99% of the time are looking for [[Aragorn|Aragorn II]], so why not make [[Aragorn]] the primary page for it? Then we can have a [[Aragorn (disambiguation)]] page which lists all the Aragorn's. An example of this can be seen on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI Wikipedia's SI article]. SI has other meanings, but the most obvious is written on the SI page, with a link at the top to a disambig page. Now there are some circumstances where out of all the characters, none particularly stand out, in which case we can simply continue with our current method. What do you guys think? --[[User:Hyarion|Hyarion]] 01:32, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:I think your idea is sensible (I guess the people @ Wikipedia have considered this matter already long and hard). This will in most of the cases work better than the current manner, IMHO. --[[User:Earendilyon|Earendilyon]] 03:19, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
::I think we should continue with the disambiguation page, but '''bold''' the most significant entry, like this:
 +
 
 +
::: * [[Minas Tirith in Beleriand|Minas Tirith]], Orodreth's fortress in the First Age
 +
::: * '''[[Minas Tirith]], capital of Gondor during the ''War of the Ring'''''
 +
 
 +
::This way readers will realize the depth of Tolkien's history without being confused as to whom are major characters and places. Just my two cents. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 12:49, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:::Hm, that's not a bad idea. One thing I like about our current method is it doesn't discriminate one article over another simply because it is known more. Just because a character was in [[The Lord of the Rings]] doesn't make it more important. No rush on determining an answer as there are so many other things that need to be done, just something to think about. --[[User:Hyarion|Hyarion]] 12:54, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
::::Well, in terms of canon, some characters and places '''are''' more important. Since ''The Silmarillion'' was never published by J.R.R. Tolkien himself, everything except ''The Hobbit'' and ''LoTR'' are of secondary importance. Considering Tolkien's numerous revisions, it's one of the few dividing lines we have to work with. Luckily, I can't think of any non-LoTR names that are more significant than those in the War of the Ring. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 13:42, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 
 +
:::::Hm, I suppose if you take canon into consideration everything could be given an importance value. [[The Adventures of Tom Bombadil]] would also be of primary importance if its based on being published in his lifetime. I'm still neutral, I could go either way with this as they both have their pros/cons. When we get a few more contributors maybe we can have more official voting sessions. --[[User:Hyarion|Hyarion]] 14:15, 21 April 2006 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 22:12, 2 November 2012

Tolkien Gateway > Council > Disambiguation proposal


I noticed Ebakunin has begun the task of adding a disambig link to characters who have the same name as other characters, awesome. So I went ahead and created Template:otherchars[former link] to make this easier. However I realized a few other wikis might have a better idea. For example people who search for Aragorn, 99% of the time are looking for Aragorn II, so why not make Aragorn the primary page for it? Then we can have a Aragorn (disambiguation) page which lists all the Aragorn's. An example of this can be seen on Wikipedia's SI article. SI has other meanings, but the most obvious is written on the SI page, with a link at the top to a disambig page. Now there are some circumstances where out of all the characters, none particularly stand out, in which case we can simply continue with our current method. What do you guys think? --Hyarion 01:32, 21 April 2006 (EDT)

I think your idea is sensible (I guess the people @ Wikipedia have considered this matter already long and hard). This will in most of the cases work better than the current manner, IMHO. --Earendilyon 03:19, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
I think we should continue with the disambiguation page, but bold the most significant entry, like this:
* Minas Tirith, Orodreth's fortress in the First Age
* Minas Tirith, capital of Gondor during the War of the Ring
This way readers will realize the depth of Tolkien's history without being confused as to whom are major characters and places. Just my two cents. --Ebakunin 12:49, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
Hm, that's not a bad idea. One thing I like about our current method is it doesn't discriminate one article over another simply because it is known more. Just because a character was in The Lord of the Rings doesn't make it more important. No rush on determining an answer as there are so many other things that need to be done, just something to think about. --Hyarion 12:54, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
Well, in terms of canon, some characters and places are more important. Since The Silmarillion was never published by J.R.R. Tolkien himself, everything except The Hobbit and LoTR are of secondary importance. Considering Tolkien's numerous revisions, it's one of the few dividing lines we have to work with. Luckily, I can't think of any non-LoTR names that are more significant than those in the War of the Ring. --Ebakunin 13:42, 21 April 2006 (EDT)
Hm, I suppose if you take canon into consideration everything could be given an importance value. The Adventures of Tom Bombadil would also be of primary importance if its based on being published in his lifetime. I'm still neutral, I could go either way with this as they both have their pros/cons. When we get a few more contributors maybe we can have more official voting sessions. --Hyarion 14:15, 21 April 2006 (EDT)