User talk:ScottDavis/plain town names/New South Wales

FYI your link to "tregeagle" is to the person, not a town in Australia Bookgrrl 00:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. This page is part of an ongoing project (User:ScottDavis/plain town names, categories and lists in the article namespace) to ensure that when a place has an article (always named as <place, state>), it has either a redirect or a link from a disambiguation page so readers can find it from a search for just <place>. Eventually, Tregeagle might be changed from a redirect to a disambig page, when the Tregeagle, New South Wales article is written. When I notice that, the link wil be deleted from this page. Thankyou. --Scott Davis ^Talk 02:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal from list when disambig entry points to red link?

I note that someone recently removed 3 places (Abernethy, Albert, Ando). In each case, the article is either a disambig page or has a link to a disambig page at the top.

In all 3 cases, the disambig page contains a red link to the NSW place (Abernethy, New South Wales; Albert, New South Wales; Ando, New South Wales). I left these on the list on the assumption that they should not be removed from this list until the article on the NSW place actually existed. Was this the intent? --Athol Mullen 00:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to confess I don't have a strong feeling either way. I've been leaving them in the list "for now". I'd say if the red link is on a disambig page and has been there for a while, it is likely to stay there and need not also be listed here. A red dab link at the top of an article though is likely to get dropped by the regular editors of that article, and should be left in this list until either an article is ~~written~~ started, or a full dab page created with the link in it. --Scott Davis ^Talk 04:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wiki policy

I don't doubt there is a policy for town name comma state, seems a solid legit.
But there is ample evidence also for what doesn't need disambiguation by having the state added doesn't need the state added.
While it's bed time, and I don't want to start searching wiki for policies buried deep in esoteric areas ... can you assist me in helping ? Dave Rave (talk) 09:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Burraga, Warialda, Culcairn

@Dave Rave: The policy in question is WP:NCAUST. I started this page a long time ago, before I took a few years off of editing Wikipedia. The policy has been watered down a bit since that time by people arguing that "predisambiguation is bad", rather than "precision and consistency is good", and I think of the "<town>, <state>" as a qualified name rather than a "predisambiguated" name. Whichever way you look at it, both <name> and <name>, <state> should lead a reader to the same article about the place they are interested in, with the former possibly taking them via a hatnote or disambiguation page. --Scott Davis ^Talk 11:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]