Talk:Clanwilliam, South Africa
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is written in South African English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Disambiguation
editThis article has taken the primary name "Clanwilliam". In my opinion, this name should be reserved for the barony of the same name in Tipperary, Ireland. Two criteria may be used:
- 1. What a reasonable person would expect to find by searching for "Clanwilliam".
- 2. Strict chronology.
By 1, the population of the barony (encompassing many towns) outstrips that of the South African town. It is more likely therefore, that the barony would engerder more searches. By 2, the barony was created before the founding of any other town. All other references, whether to towns, rugby clubs or fish species, owe their origin to the barony.
From the above two, it's clear that the barony should have primacy.Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I think that between the Irish barony, the Canadian municipality, and the South African town, there's no reasonable way to pick a primary article, so the primary article should be a disambiguation page linking to the other three (and the various other Clanwilliam-titled articles). How would that work for you? - htonl (talk) 21:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I would add: it seems to me that, given that Irish baronies seem to be primarily of historical interest (except for land registration), the barony is somewhat less important than its population would otherwise suggest. - htonl (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- The issue is primarily about what a hypothetical reader is likely to consider the primary topic. As an Irish ed. I was not aware of the South African or Australian iterations and expect that most Irish eds would wish to be directed to the barony article, notwithstanding that its interest is primarily historic. I think treating the dab as the primary article the best solution under the circumstances. RashersTierney (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- Similarly, a South African reader is going to expect the SA town, and a Canadian reader will probably expect the Manitoban municipality. I have moved the SA town away from being the primary topic, and (for the moment) Clanwilliam redirects to Clanwilliam (disambiguation). In a minute I'm going to request a move of the disambig page to the primary title. - htonl (talk) 22:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- The issue is primarily about what a hypothetical reader is likely to consider the primary topic. As an Irish ed. I was not aware of the South African or Australian iterations and expect that most Irish eds would wish to be directed to the barony article, notwithstanding that its interest is primarily historic. I think treating the dab as the primary article the best solution under the circumstances. RashersTierney (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
- I would add: it seems to me that, given that Irish baronies seem to be primarily of historical interest (except for land registration), the barony is somewhat less important than its population would otherwise suggest. - htonl (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
OK, on Talk:Clanwilliam (disambiguation) I have requested that Clanwilliam (disambiguation) be moved to Clanwilliam. - htonl (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)