Talk:Scott Peterson (disambiguation)

Edit war

I've added a link to this disambiguation-page at the beginning of Scott Peterson (convicted murderer). I hope this ends the edit war between you 2. Peace, Nanouk 13:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Removal

I removed the golfer Scott Peterson from the page, whose name is actually Scott Petersen. --Marco Passarani 21:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

AfD result

— JIP | Talk 11:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

explanation please?

The admin who closed the discussion appended this note to the {afd}

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. The current way just won't do, though, because the article Scott Peterson needs to be something other than a redirect. So I propose one of two solutions:

1. Move Scott Peterson (convicted murderer) to Scott Peterson, or
2. Move Scott Peterson (disambiguation) to Scott Peterson.

I must be missing something. There are lots - of disambiguation pages that simply redirect to multiple pages. -- Geo Swan 12:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I think it's silly to have three articles whose name is Scott Peterson followed by something in parenthesis: Scott Peterson (convicted murderer), Scott Peterson (writer) and Scott Peterson (disambiguation), when the article whose name is Scott Peterson without anything after it is a redirect. I see no point in having article names with something in parenthesis when there is no real article with the same name without the parenthesis. Don't the Wikipedia disambiguation guidelines state that disambiguations should be done in one of the following ways?

1. If one meaning is significantly major, have it as Article name, and either:
   1. Have it link to articles named Article name (other meaning), Article name (yet other meaning), etc. or:
   2. Have it link to Article name (disambiguation), which in turn links to Article name (other meaning), Article name (yet other meaning), etc.
2. If all meanings are of equal interest, make Article name a disambiguation page, and have it link to Article name (one meaning), Article name (another meaning), Article name (yet other meaning), etc.

None of those options seem to include having Article name as a redirect to Article name (one meaning). — JIP | Talk 13:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

• I would strongly discourage Option 2 (Move Scott Peterson (disambiguation) to Scott Peterson.) because this would bring us back to the situation we were trying to escape from. A while ago the content of Scott Peterson was constantly changed from a redirect to a disambig to a redirect, and so on. To end the edit war I created this page for the disambig, and put a notice and link to it on top of Scott Peterson (convicted murderer). So, the problem was solved: the disambig page stayed alive, and also the redirect at Scott Peterson stayed, no more reason for fighting.
  Option 1 on the other hand was already suggested at Talk:Scott Peterson (convicted murderer) without any objections so far.
  --Nanouk 14:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Note

Disambiguation pages titled "(disambiguation)" are not used when there are only two articles involved. The only type of disambiguation page that ever has only two articles on it (and is supposed to; obviously hundreds and hundreds of disambig pages currently violate disambig guidelines) is a page like GWB, which not only doesn't have "(disambiguation)" at the end (and thus is something that people will regularly find with the Search engine, unlike this page), but also has no dramatic likelihood for one article to be looked for over the other. This is not the case here; over 99% of people who search for "Scott Peterson" will be looking for the convicted murderer. So, the clear course of action is to have Scott Peterson and Scott Peterson (writer) simply link to each other at the top of their pages, and not to add the silly extra step of requiring people to visit a disambig page for no reason too. A easy little link is much easier than a whole distinct page for so little information. -Silence 17:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)