Talk:Dikson (urban-type settlement)

External links

It's funny how the link in the "External links" section (images at panoramio.com) takes you to the town of Tiksi and not Dikson... KNewman (talk) 06:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Could've just removed it, you know :) Gone now. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Category

Closed city?

--Nnemo (talk) 19:08, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 19 October 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No consensus that this article is the primary topic. No prejudice against a new discussion to see if a different dab should be used. Jenks24 (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

---

• Dikson (urban-type settlement) → Dikson
• Dikson → Dikson (disambiguation)

– Of the 3 items listed at Dikson (disambiguation), only the settlement is called just "Dikson", and the other two (the airport and the island) are partial title matches. I would also argue that the settlement is the most famous, being one of northernmost towns in the world. At the very minimum, this unwieldy and unintuitive disambiguation, based on Russian census classification, should be replaced with something more sensible, like Dikson (town) or Dikson (settlement). No such user (talk) 07:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 07:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - completely out of sync with the treatment of thousands of other articles. See WP:NCGN guideline where interestingly Dikson is given as a specific example for Russian naming conventions. Also fundamental errors in the additional RM rationale. In russian settlement classification a town is a completely different form of classification compared to urban type settlement. Fenix down (talk) 08:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

When the name of the locality is unique, but conflicts with the name of a different concept... – which "different concept" the name Dikson conflicts with? In English, Dikson Island is called exactly like that, as far as I can tell. No such user (talk) 09:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Well I would suggest the airport initially. When someone talks about flying from x to y, they don't say "x airport" to "y airport". I don't see why the settlement should take priority simply for being one of the most northern settlements when the airport is also one of the most northern airports. Fenix down (talk) 09:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Airports are typically named after the nearby town, or after a public figure, with "Airport" attached, as would be a natural expectation for a general-purpose encyclopedia. A long-standing and natural convention in Wikipedia is just that, as you can examine e.g. by perusing Category:Airports in Irkutsk Oblast or any of its sibling categories. Not even a single Google book is devoted to the airport, so I find that argument stretched. No such user (talk) 11:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

I kind of get you point about the airport though with the airport, island and settlement all overlapping / abutting each other to some degree I also kind of disagree in this instance. I just think that it is perfectly plausible to assume that someone who was unaware of the number of places called Dikson in such close proximity to each other would benefit from the current clarification in the article title. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one and see what others think. Fenix down (talk) 12:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough. Obviously, I'm not a fan of short dab pages containing only related entries (the worst ones disambiguate "Foo province", "Foo airport", "Foo municipality", "Foo cathedral", and as a cherry on the top, the city is titled "Foo, Foo"); whichever Dikson article you pick, links to the other two are (or can be made) available near the top. But I understand not everybody has the same opinion. No such user (talk) 21:14, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose. Such a move would imply that the urban-type settlement is the primary meaning of "Dikson", which is something that's not at all obvious. The island is an equally strong contender for the "primary topic" title (note that "Island" is not a part of the name, it's simply a disambiguator which is not parenthesized only because such is the convention for naming articles about islands), and in such cases the main term is normally occupied by the disambiguation page, which is what we have now.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 19, 2015; 13:30 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.