Talk:Bexley Hall (disambiguation)

prod discussion

This disambig page was where Bexley Hall ended up. I'm questioning changing that to a redirect to the stub about the seminary, when Bexley Hall (MIT) is actually a longer article/section. I'm also questioning if one is significantly more notable, an MIT dormatory or a Episcopal seminary. The person who made the move obviously thinks the seminary is more notable. I would argue that neither is significantly more notable. Having lived in the dorm for 4 years I'll admit a bias, but I suspect the dorm is known by more graduates than the seminary.--J Clear 23:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three unrelated questions:

Can I clarify that you are not questioning the deletion of the disambig page, (which you can do simply by deleting the prod template)? Since there are only 2 articles/sections, they can have top disambiguation, which I already included at the top of the Bexley Hall (Seminary) stub.
Are you questioning what should go at Bexley Hall? I am sympathetic. Please have your say at Talk:Bexley Hall (Seminary)#Requested move
I am afraid we may accidentally delete some authorship history that is needed for GFDL. I assume there must be an original article about the MIT hall before it was merged into List of MIT dormitories (now List of MIT undergraduate dormitories). However, I have not yet found it in the histories here. Was there an original article about the Bexley Hall (MIT), before this one in November 2004 here (with history here)?

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to point out the oddity that...

1. The article for Bexley Hall seminary is actually just called Bexley Hall. 2. The disambig page calls it Bexley Hall seminary, while calling the MIT dorm just "Bexley Hall". 3. The disambig page links to "Bexley Hall seminary", which redirects to "Bexley Hall".

This should probably be sorted out.