| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Middle Men article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tolkien?
editThe Middle Men or Men of Twilight, is a racial group of characters from J.R.R. Tolkien's legendarium. Which means that the TV episode would be better with (Torchwood). In ictu oculi (talk) 05:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Please review WP:DAB; disambiguation is only warranted if there is an existing article with the same name. That is not the case here.
-- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}}11:17, 4 July 2014 (UTC)- User:Edokter, I understood WP:DAB to me mean disambiguate by topic not title:
WP:DAB Disambiguation in Wikipedia is the process of resolving the conflicts that arise when a single term is ambiguous—when it refers to more than one topic covered by Wikipedia. (A "topic covered by Wikipedia" is either the main subject of an article, or a minor subject covered by an article in addition to the article's main subject.)
- It does say "topic" not "title", and both have articles. So is it relevant to consider whether "The Middle Men" in Google Books refers to Tolkien or Dr Who? Seems to be 50/50. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- That's the generic description. The primary concern here is Naming articles in such a way that each has a unique title. My concern is your implied assertion that Tolkien's characters are a primary topic, as opposed to this episode, when in fact it is only the characters' secondary name.
-- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}}16:22, 4 July 2014 (UTC)- WP:DAB There are three important aspects to disambiguation, that's one of three.
- No, as usual with most generic names there's no primary topic, there rarely is. The Tolkien isn't, the Dr Who isn't. Neither should be at Primary Topic slot. If this was the other way round and the Tolkien article was here would it automatically be primary? Evidently not. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:19, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- The general practice for two ambiguous topics/title/what have you is to put a hatnote in each article linking to the other one. If there are more than two possible meanings then we should make a proper DAB page and move the relevant articles to a disambiguated title. But in this case there doesn't seem to be the need for a move. De728631 (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- I suppose then as long as no one is confused by the Luke Wilson film then a hat note will do. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- The general practice for two ambiguous topics/title/what have you is to put a hatnote in each article linking to the other one. If there are more than two possible meanings then we should make a proper DAB page and move the relevant articles to a disambiguated title. But in this case there doesn't seem to be the need for a move. De728631 (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- That's the generic description. The primary concern here is Naming articles in such a way that each has a unique title. My concern is your implied assertion that Tolkien's characters are a primary topic, as opposed to this episode, when in fact it is only the characters' secondary name.
- It does say "topic" not "title", and both have articles. So is it relevant to consider whether "The Middle Men" in Google Books refers to Tolkien or Dr Who? Seems to be 50/50. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)