Talk:Hershey's
This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Dab "Hershey's"
[edit]A colleague and i carried on the following discussion at their talk page.
--Jerzy•t 20:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the benefit of your greater familiarity with the Hershey's-related topics, and please say so (here is fine) when you're done, so we avoid further edit conflicts. You may also want to give some serious attention to WP:MoSDab and WP:Dab, since, as it stands, some of what you've changed will have to be put back.
While it appears (contrary to what one of your edit-summaries might be construed to say) that you have a grasp of the fact that Dabs do not have entries for everything that is simply called by the term being disambiguated (someone's error, which i presume got the Dab tagged for CU in the 1st place), you should consider looking into the distinction between primary-topic Dab'n and equal Dab'n; you may be in effect making a reasonable argument for
- The Hershey Company to be renamed "Hershey's" (and the Hershey's Dab to move to Hershey's (disambiguation), or
- (a situation that i believe to be a common sense extension of the explicit guidelines, and implicit in them) "Hershey's" being a Rdr to The Hershey Company, and the lead line of Hershey's (disambiguation) reading
- Hershey's is the chocolate-focused manufacturer The Hershey Company.
--Jerzy•t 20:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- The Hershey Company is the official company's name, so renaming that article is not an option at all. It would be completely inaccurate. "Hershey's" is the name used on many of its products, but not all of them, so all of those options would be severe misstatements. Hershey's is also the name used on the products made by Hershey Creamery Company, which are not the same company nor even related (if you check the latter, you can enjoy reading about their rather embittered legal battles over that Hershey word). So redirecting Hershey's to The Hershey Company would not be neutral nor the best option, to me, as there are also other Hershey's (though not as many as Hershey). I created the dab over the redirect that was already there because it was simply redirecting to The Hershey Company, which was not a neutral treatment, IMHO, of Hershey Creamery Company. I'm not a dab expert or anything, I had someone who does work in dabs check it and he tagged it for clean up. Perhaps another option would be to merge it to Hershey (disambiguation) to ensure more neutral treatment. I created separately because other similar type things seem to be considered separate entries in other dabs I looked at. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I suspect you are right about not renaming: there does seem to be an indecent degree of respect paid to "official names" of organizations. (E.g. tho no one insists on moving Moll Flanders to The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders, and despite what the Constitution calls it, we have Supreme Court of the United States, -- copied from its Web page headline -- for what would be sensibly be Supreme Court (U.S.).) There are a couple of non-controversial guideline deviations that i too would have places a tag over, if i weren't already working on it; i'll clean them up.
But my main concern at this point is with the 300s: there's nothing wrong with a user learning something on a Dab page, but entries have to be written for the sole purpose of getting, in this case, someone interested in the series of races those 3 were part of, to Camping World 300, despite their name for it being "Hershey's". (Note that Hershey's Kisses 300 is a Rdr they could have used if they knew that much, and they're not likely to stray to Hershey's Chocolate World bcz we fail to mention the Kisses.) The place where they learn, or refresh their memory, about what "Hershey's" has to do with the article they want should be at that article. Take a look tomorrow; if you're still uncomfortable with it, we can close this here and copy it onto MoSDab talk to seek consensus among more heads.
--Jerzy•t 07:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I suspect you are right about not renaming: there does seem to be an indecent degree of respect paid to "official names" of organizations. (E.g. tho no one insists on moving Moll Flanders to The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders, and despite what the Constitution calls it, we have Supreme Court of the United States, -- copied from its Web page headline -- for what would be sensibly be Supreme Court (U.S.).) There are a couple of non-controversial guideline deviations that i too would have places a tag over, if i weren't already working on it; i'll clean them up.
- I made a few minor tweaks to the first two, but otherwise its fine. And true on the races (though if I remember right, only two of the races have redirects)...it just seemed unbalanced to decide Hershey's meant the chocolate company when the others are fairly big in their own rights. :) -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- We're not in perfect agreement, but for me, in adequate agreement. For the record, i'd put "nickname" only in the target article, in contrast to my (clumsy and picky) "theme-park/visitor-center facility", bcz confusion abt the nick would not interfere with selecting the right article, while i can imagine someone ruling out HCW bcz they are familiar with only one aspect (theme park or visitor center, but not the only one we mention). But evaluating the wording of either the company's entry or HCW's is pretty subjective, and disagreement is neither surprising nor worth trying to eliminate. Thanks for the good process!
--Jerzy•t 05:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- We're not in perfect agreement, but for me, in adequate agreement. For the record, i'd put "nickname" only in the target article, in contrast to my (clumsy and picky) "theme-park/visitor-center facility", bcz confusion abt the nick would not interfere with selecting the right article, while i can imagine someone ruling out HCW bcz they are familiar with only one aspect (theme park or visitor center, but not the only one we mention). But evaluating the wording of either the company's entry or HCW's is pretty subjective, and disagreement is neither surprising nor worth trying to eliminate. Thanks for the good process!