Talk:Holmes and Watson (disambiguation)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Holmes and Watson (disambiguation) page.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Two disambiguation pages

The reason I broke Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (disambiguation) away from Holmes and Watson (disambiguation) is because there are two articles with the title Holmes and Watson ( Holmes & Watson and Holmes & Watson. Madrid Days) whereas there are two articles with Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson in the names (Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson and Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson). As Help:Disambiguation says "Disambiguation pages on Wikipedia are used as a process of resolving conflicts in article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic, making that term likely to be the natural title for more than one article." Nobody would confuse the latter two with the former two as the titles are completely different. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 16:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your repeated assertion on this for reasons we've already discussed ad nauseam. See below. Ubcule (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the insults and bolded comments (WP:TALKNO, WP:SHOUT) and I have asked you reaptedly to stop reposting the exact same conversation in multiple areas (WP:MULTI WP:TPYES). It is harassment for you to continually post the same insults everywhere. Article talk pages are for discussion of the article itself, NOT other editors. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 18:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Note; at time of writing, this dispute is still under discussion at WP:ANI. Further responses by myself on this matter have been posted there). Ubcule (talk) 01:13, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A literal interpretation of WP:DABCOMBINE suggests separate disambiguation pages, with no wikilinks on the introductory line because there is no primary topic. However, invoking WP:IAR, I consider this combined version the most helpful to the reader. One title could easily be mistaken for the other and, for readers who did know whether to include more than the surnames, I don't think ploughing through two other options is too onerous. Although it's only a PTM, we might even list The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson as a "See also". Other opinions might be available via WT:Disambiguation. Certes (talk) 21:32, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggested addition is similar to how I laid out Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (disambiguation). If the consensus is that one disambiguation works better than two, then my vote would be that Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (disambiguation) makes more sense as the more complete title but I will defer to consensus. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 21:42, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think either title works. Is a page like this at the full title Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (disambiguation) a good compromise? Certes (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably not have the wikilinks in the introductory line as you noted per WP:DABCOMBINE because I'm positive there will be links to those characters on every single article linked from the disambiguation. Otherwise I think that is a very good middle ground. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 23:48, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Certes: Hi there, thank you for your contribution.

I'm glad you liked one of my earlier versions which- as you note- was an attempt to compromise between the guidelines and a situation where bending them slightly could (arguably!) be justified in terms of helpfulness. I'm not sure how you feel about the later version I created which uses Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (duo) as a subsection redirect link.

My argument was always in favour of combining them as per "variant spellings of names" for precisely the reason you give- dab pages are aimed at inexperienced users who don't know what they're looking for.

Personally, I'm not much bothered whether Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (disambiguation) or Holmes and Watson (disambiguation) is the default, so long as one directs to the other.

Ubcule (talk) 01:13, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (duo) doesn't belong on the disambiguation because it isn't even an article. It is just a redirect you created to point to a subsection of Sherlock Holmes which would already be linked in your version. Nobody would look up "Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (duo)" because that isn't a thing. They aren't a "duo". ThaddeusSholto (talk) 01:30, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linking via redirect is permissible and even encouraged (in preference to piping) on dab pages. If "duo" maybe isn't the best choice of qualifier (and I don't claim that it is), you or anyone else are welcome to suggest differently.

Anyway, that version was a suggestion; the earlier one might be better.

A lot of article names with qualifiers that appear on dab pages wouldn't necessarily be looked up directly either; this isn't an argument to exclude them. They're typically there precisely because the obvious "type in look up article title" is likely to have more than one use and there isn't necessarily a primary article (or if there is, it isn't guaranteed to be the one people are looking up). Ubcule (talk) 01:54, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, Wiktionary defines duo as "Two people who work or collaborate together as partners; especially [but by implication not restricted to] those who perform music together".

I'm not sure why you claim so strongly that "that isn't a thing. They aren't a "duo"." It's technically correct AFAICT, whether or not it's the best-sounding choice of words here. Ubcule (talk) 02:03, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that using a redirect is fine here. Compare dab William Burke, where William Burke (Burke and Hare murders) correctly redirects to a section of a joint biography. The qualifier "duo" doesn't sound quite right but I can't think of a better alternative at the moment. Certes (talk) 02:30, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should take a step back. What is the primary topic of the term Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson? Is it really the TV series to which that link leads? If not then we might move the article back to Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (TV series) and usurp its title for the dab. The new Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson (duo) should certainly be an entry in the dab's list, and probably the first. I doubt that most readers searching for Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson have the Soviet film in mind; we might move that too and redirect its old title to the dab. Holmes and Watson currently redirects to Holmes & Watson, a 2018 American film, but we can avoid bad links like the one from Marilyn Imrie by retargeting Holmes and Watson to the dab too. That's a radical change; is it a step too far? Certes (talk) 02:23, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This whole dispute "is, of course, a trifle, but there is nothing so important as trifles." (TWIS) Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My take, a disambig should be where people come when they are not sure. "MMMMM, bugger what was that soviet TV series, Holmes and Watson?". This is just the sort of thing we should include.Slatersteven (talk) 16:33, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]