Talk:Überwald
(Redirected from Talk:Überwald (Bergstraße))
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | This article contains a translation of Überwald from de.wikipedia. |
Requested move
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived 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: Both Moved. It's unclear whether real-world meanings always take precedence over fictional; the guideline wording is just 'long-term significance.' When something exists in the real world it seems to be a point in its favor when choosing a primary topic. User:Guelf who commented below is now blocked by a checkuser so his opinion was not considered. It was not decided here whether Tsort should have a DAB page rather than hatnotes; I merely created the hatnotes. EdJohnston (talk) 01:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- See also related RM discussion at Talk:Genua (disambiguation)#Requested move.
– The proposed titles redirect to sections of Discworld geography. I suggest that the real-world meanings have greater long-term significance and should occupy the base titles, with hatnotes for the Discworld locations. --BDD (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support real geography comes first in an encyclopedia. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- Comment, I would probably opt for a regular disambiguation page instead of reversing the autoredirect+hatnote situation. - FakirNL (talk) 09:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- If we had more than two uses, I'd agree with you. WP:TWODABS doesn't mean that we can't have a dab with only two items, but IMO it illustrates why they're not preferable. --BDD (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- It's just my personal opinion which is probably shaped more by Dutch than English wiki policy. With a regular dp and some dab-fixing now and then people always get to the right page immediately without being annoyed with (my pov) ugly hatnotes about something they don't care about. - FakirNL (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- If we had more than two uses, I'd agree with you. WP:TWODABS doesn't mean that we can't have a dab with only two items, but IMO it illustrates why they're not preferable. --BDD (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support per nom. -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 04:18, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support Überwald move. I don't absolutely, categorically buy the "a real-world place is automatically more notable than a fictional one" argument (I could found a small town called Mordor, but I wouldn't expect Mordor to be moved to Mordor (fiction) or whatever any time soon). In this case, it's patently obvious that the real place is more notable than the fictional one, popular as Discworld might be.
Weak support Tsort move, only because tsort (Unix) is a real article, and the Discworld Tsort just a list entry. I don't buy the idea that a piece of software is automatically more notable than an fictional place. I could write a *n*x utility,mordor... Actually, Disambiguate Tsort: This is a clear case where WP:TWODABS can be ignored. Note: The Überwald and Genua moves share the same argument, but the Tsort one should have been separate, since it raises different issues; "related to Discworld" isn't enough of a reason to fuse RMs into multi-page nominations. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 10:39, 25 April 2014 (UTC) Changed: 11:00, 25 April 2014 (UTC) Comment. I don't necessarily oppose these moves, but I find some of the reasons given to be problematic. I don't see any reason to give real places preference over fictional places, nor do I see anything in the guideline to support this approach. Also, Überwald, the real-world area in Germany, is not a likely desired destination, at least not compared the fictional locality, as you can see from this Google ranking. We want to help the reader get to the article he is most likely to be seeking, not judge his reading habits. Guelf (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2014 (UTC). Striking one comment. User:Guelf has been blocked by a checkuser. EdJohnston (talk) 01:21, 1 May 2014 (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.