Talk:Mike Gonzales

Hatnote
@User:Technical 13: I'm having trouble seeing the relevance of WP:BRINT. That section concerns navigational templates, which include navboxes and sidebars, but not hatnotes. Could you elaborate? – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , navigational templates are templates that help navigate from one article or page to another, such as navboxes, sidebars, hatnotes, stub templates, etc. (disambiguation) links should only be used if you the main page for the topic is not the disambiguation page itself.  At least that is my understanding of BRINT and the whole confusing mess.  I see you've been around for much longer than I have though, so I'm not going to push too hard for such a minor point.  Happy editing! — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 02:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:Navigation templates says "There are two types of navigation templates, navigation boxes, or navboxes, and sidebars". That essay doesn't mention hatnotes anywhere, nor does WP:NAVBOX, the relevant guideline. The reasoning given at WP:BRINT seems to support that narrower definition, given that it refers to instances where a template might contain a link to the article it's placed on (something I can't imagine ever happening in a hatnote). I agree of course that it's a thoroughly minor issue  – I have a vague sense though that there are editors and/or bots who patrol for WP:INTDABLINK issues (e.g. ) so by getting it right we might save someone a little time further down the road. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 03:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , I made this issue a moot point and moved Mike Gonzalez to Mike Gonzalez (disambiguation) over redirect and restored your version of the hatnote. This, I believe, resolves both of our concerns. :) Happy editing! — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 04:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No, that doesn't work. Per WP:DABNAME "(disambiguation)" should only be in a page name when there's a primary topic. I appreciate the effort to find a compromise but I'm not sure one exists that's compatible with the relevant policies and guidelines. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 12:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Based on page hits, Mike Gonzalez (pitcher) is the primary topic with 1,573 total page views and a high view of 73 on 4 February 2014, then Mike González (catcher) with 881 total page views and a high view of 59 on 23 January 2014, and finally Mike Gonzalez (historian) with 644 total page views and a high view of 22 on 16 December 2013. If you agree with these findings, I'll find an admin to make the move.  Thanks. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 14:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't disagree, but it seems like something of a (convoluted and circuitous) solution in need of a problem. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 12:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)