Talk:Rumble Fish (disambiguation)

Dab page format

Per the style guidelines for disambiguation pages, on dab pages with the (disambiguation) clarifier, the plain-title (primary topic) article is linked in the intro sentence. This is because the most likely path to a (disambiguation) page is through the plain-title article, so that topic shouldn't be in the list with the other uses since it is those uses that are being disambiguated.--ShelfSkewed Talk 13:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But why choose the film and not any of the other choices as the main link? This is biased and non-neutral. I think the policy if it reads that way is wrong. All should be listed equally (perhaps in alphabetical order) and that's that. Gillyweed (talk) 01:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's got nothing to do with POV or preferring one entry over another; it's just separating the article that users are not likely to be looking for from the list of other choices. The dab page is Rumble Fish (disambiguation), so its matching plain-title is Rumble Fish. Therefore, the most likely path to this dab page is through the film article, and users are unlikely to be looking for it, so why clutter. I agree that the situation is less clear-cut in this case, because the video game and the UK band could also be considered plain-title entries, but I still don't see that as a reason to deviate from the usual style. In any case, if you disagree with the policy, the place to debate the issue is Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages).

To step beyond this argument, however, we could solve this issue to both our satisfactions by moving the film article to Rumble Fish (film) and getting the dab page moved to Rumble Fish. I don't see why the film should be considered the sole primary use to the disadvantage of the original novel. This would require going through the Requested moves process and dabbing a lot of links, but I'm game. Thoughts?--ShelfSkewed Talk 04:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]