Talk:Talhaiarn

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Wales Mid‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales 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.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hatnote

There has been, for a while, a hatnote on this article linking to the John Jones disambiguation page. There has developped a disagreement between myself and Deb, another editor, about whether or not the inclusion of the hatnote on this article is justified. We have stated our rationale to each other on each other's talk pages and we still disagree about whether the hatnote should be included, therefore I thought it best to bring the discussion here in order to open the discussion up to other editors.

I believe that the hatnote should be removed from the article because of the the guideline about not disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous. The rationale behind this guideline, applied to the current case, is that no user who is looking for one John Jones would end up at an article about another. When a user types "John Jones" into the search bar, the user is provided immediately with a disambiguation page that lists all the people named "John Jones" about whom we have aritcles. No one looking for another John Jones would end up at this one because they would have been provided with the option of choosing between the two before arriving at the article. Even if they accidently chose the wrong one on the disambiguation page, they would know about the disambiguation page because they were just at it and they could easily just go back. If they arrived at the article via an internal link, they would have been directed to the correct article because that would have had to have been specified on the preceding article or else it would have directed them to the disambiguation page. Not disambiguating article names that are not ambiguous is an established editing guideline on Wikipedia and there is nothing special about this particular case that suggests that an exception should be made for it. Neelix (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]