Talk:Morning Glory

Why isn't this Morning Glory (film)?

I think it's ridiculous that this page is Morning Glory. The most common use of Morning Glory is obviously the flower and shouldn't both Morning glory and Morning Glory link to the plant? Having the deciding factor on which page is which be the capitalized 'G' seems quite silly. I realize that last year some users hashed this all out, but I find their final decision to be odd. Hollerama 16:53, August 9, 2006 (PST)

Hah. Well, i personally would have no objections to it being moved, obviously. makes sense to me. I don't think most users think to disambiguate between upper and lower case letters when typing something in the search box. But as there is a disambig at the top of the page, it isn't all that big a deal for it to remain here. --heah 00:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

(oh, and i actually think that this page should be a disambig, for reasons below. there's a lot of morning glories out there, not just a flower and a movie--7 blue links and 4 red links can be found on the disambig page.) --heah 00:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

But most of those things get their name from the flower, right? I wouldn't think that a disambiguation page would be the best. It would be better than how it is right now though. Hollerama 11:34, August 10, 2006 (PST)

Move vote

Ok, just today Heah moved what was Morning Glory to Morning Glory (film). I find it abusrd that Morning Glory is a redirect when it should be filled with an article...anything but a redirect. Since it was edited more than once, it'll have to be deleted to move an article to it. Cburnett 21:30, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Please vote for what you think should be at Morning Glory:

Film (this page)

Move the film back to Morning Glory (this is the way it was prior to Heah's move):

1. Cburnett 21:38, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
2. support Lachatdelarue (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Disambig page

Move Morning glory (disambiguation) to Morning Glory:

Other

Please specify what should be at Morning Glory.

1. Heah 22:51, 4 May 2005 (UTC) If it is to be changed, Morning Glory should be a redirect to Morning glory with the latter as the disambig page. I abstain --Heah 01:21, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

There's no reason for the film to be anywhere but it's title. The capital 'G' in the title makes it unneccessary to disambiguate it from the others, since Morning Glory and Morning glory are two different pages. Lachatdelarue (talk) 23:14, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

I think the vote should just be as to whether Morning Glory (film) is moved back to Morning Glory, and leave any other ideas to this discussion area. I've noticed when there is more than one choice, or the choices are left open-ended, things tend to get confusing, and it makes it more difficult for an admin to determine whether or not a rough consensus has been reached. Lachatdelarue (talk) 22:43, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

previewed and forgot to save, losing everything i just wrote, then an edit conflict . . . anyways, the reason this was done is that Morning Glory (the film) and Morning glory (the plant) had virtually the same name, which is rather confusing; neither seemed a better choice for the main page. I don't think that it makes sense for Morning Glory and Morning glory to be seperate pages on different topics; that sort of case sensitive searching, where one does not redirect to the other, seems awkward, confusing, and an impediment to searching. As for what the main page should be, a google search for +"morning glory" +flower turned up 163,000 hits, while +"morning glory +film turned up less than half, at 72,700. given that, i don't think that the film should be the main page; given the large number of film hits and the presumably high occurance of other searches (eg the oasis song) i don't think the plant (currently Morning glory (plant)) should be the main page either. personally i see no problem with the disambig where it is now, but i'm fine with moving the disambig to Morning glory with Morning Glory as a redirect if it is to be moved, and i voted as such. To answer Lachatdelarue's comments, i'll preemptively make it clear that i also accept choice 2 (disambig page) if concensus is unclear. --Heah 22:51, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, there is no problem with having an article Morning glory and Morning Glory about separate topics, each one can have a disambig link at the top to the other one, or to the disambig page. I think having parenthetical disambiguations makes it more difficult. And, as you pointed out, the film has half as many google hits as the plant, so the plant is obviously the primary usage. This sort of primary usage is the whole reason there are any pages that have '(disambiguation)' in the title (e.g. Club/Club (disambiguation) and Foot/Foot (disambiguation)). At the very least, Morning glory (plant) should be at Morning glory. Lachatdelarue (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

There are plenty of articles that differ by capitalization. Most are exactly this case when a semi-common word is used as a title so it's capitalized. Morning Glory and Morning glory are two distinct articles and we don't need to jump to the Microsoft Windows words where capitalization is meaningless. Morning glory can be about the plant and Morning Glory can be about the film and appropriate {{dablink}}s added. Cburnett 23:38, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the rv's, I was trying to change all my votes back again (and yes, that's my final answer, and yes, i was going to replace your comment, Cburnett). I had changed my mind b/c I couldn't find a solid example of two articles with identical names but different capitalization (which made me start to think I was wrong), but now I've found Pulp fiction and Pulp Fiction, and I feel justified in my opinion. I am now going to stop thinking about it, for now. Lachatdelarue (talk) 23:50, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I was just letting the page be until you decided what was up. :) Cburnett 23:59, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the consideration, I promise I'm done now :) Lachatdelarue (talk) 00:03, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for creating unnecessary work and moving the page sans discussion; i'm not an admin and can't delete stuff but i'll help fix it if i can. I still think it is a bad idea to have two pages only differing in name by capitalization; but in the absence of any general policy on the matter, several examples of similarly named entries and being the only one not consenting i'll rescind my vote. So now my question is, what do we do with the disambig page? will it be a seperate page, remaining where it is, or popped back on the bottom of the film or the plant? I prefer the former, of course, as there are more than two common usages- +"morning glory" +Oasis gets 104,000 hits on google, and there's a couple random ones on the disambig page. But i'll leave the decision up to you two, not having been here as long as you and feeling like i've caused enough headaches for one day . . . Sorry again, i'll be more careful and by the book with future edits such as this. (I'd also like to fix the link on the disambig page to so it links to the album and not just oasis, but i'll hold off for a decision on the future of that page.) --Heah 01:21, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Ok, since the person that moved the pages has realized his/her mistake, I'll go ahead and move the pages. Heah, don't worry about it. Everyone makes mistakes, especially when they're new (hell, I've been around for about a year now, and still do stuff that gets me yelled at occasionally); plus, it filled up some of the time when i had nothing to do on my day off. I also have already fixed the link to the Oasis album on the disambig. page. Here's where everything's gonna go: Morning Glory (film) back to Morning Glory, Morning glory (plant) back to Morning glory and the disambig page will stay where it is. I'll also be sure there's a 'dablink' on the top of the two main articles to the disambig. Have a nice night (or whatever time of day it is for you guys). Lachatdelarue (talk) 03:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Don't sweat it, no hard feelings or anything. We'll just let the page mellow for the remainder of the 5 days for the vote and see. Someone else might have some thoughts to share. If I were to handle it all right now, I'd:

• Put this page back to Morning Glory
• Move Morning glory (plant) to Morning glory
• Move Morning glory to Morning glory (disambiguation)
• Put a {{dablink}} on both Morning glory & Morning Glory

Cburnett 03:57, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

URGENT: Don't vote, just move

Please just move the article, the page was previously used by the flower article, the film is clearly named after (ie for) the flower. Sorry that I can't move it as a "new user" (someone kick a wiki-admin for that policy), please someone else do it as a matter of urgency and put the flower article in this place. -- Unlikelynick 10:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC) . o O (amateurs!)

And sorry to the people who think that a capital G makes all the difference. It doesn't. Plant names should also be capitalised, just like Film Names. Whaddaya gonna do now? Huh? Huh? -- Unlikelynick 10:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC)