Talk:Peter (Fringe episode)

Horrendous, horrendous title
Come on people, really? Peter (Fringe)? Can we really say that this episode is the primary topic for Peter (Fringe)? This should obviously be at Peter (Fringe episode). john k (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peter (Fringe). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130808150433/http://www.youngartistawards.org/noms32.html to http://www.youngartistawards.org/noms32.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110313080722/http://www.fox.com/fringe/recaps/season-2/episode-16/ to http://www.fox.com/fringe/recaps/season-2/episode-16/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:38, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Peter (Fringe). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110616082536/http://www.ugo.com/tv/john-noble-fringe-interview to http://www.ugo.com/tv/john-noble-fringe-interview
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110522173741/http://www.tv.com/john-noble-teases-fringes-spring-premiere/story/22247.html to http://www.tv.com/john-noble-teases-fringes-spring-premiere/story/22247.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121011233349/http://www.fox.com/fringe/_ugc/images/science/ScienceOfFringe_215.pdf to http://www.fox.com/fringe/_ugc/images/science/ScienceOfFringe_215.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110130054603/http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/fringe_is_going_back_to_the_past_jZ3v36C83GAVjbw5pORlKI to http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/fringe_is_going_back_to_the_past_jZ3v36C83GAVjbw5pORlKI

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:50, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 21 November 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved as proposed. There's a consensus for move. (non-admin closure) – Ammarpad (talk) 07:27, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

– Both titles are ambiguous as they can mean the episodes and the characters, Peter Bishop and Olivia Dunham. Per WP:NCTV, the use of extended disambiguation "episode" is needed here. Gonnym (talk) 07:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Peter (Fringe) → Peter (Fringe episode)
 * Olivia (Fringe) → Olivia (Fringe episode)
 * Adding examples recent similar RMs: Talk:Killer Frost (The Flash episode), Talk:Rose (Doctor Who episode). --Gonnym (talk) 19:19, 21 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Support – Current titles are ambiguous as to whether they mean, for example, Peter (Fringe episode) or Peter (Fringe character). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 13:32, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support both - good call. I suggest keeping the resulting redirects as pointers to the episode articles. The hatnotes can redirect people looking for the characters. -- Netoholic @ 15:44, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose Presumably we are only talking about two possible pages if a user is searching on "'peter' 'fringe'", the character or the episode. This can be handled by a hat note on the episode page to get them to the character. Distinguishing further doesn't help. --M asem (t) 16:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Of course it does. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * How? Again, let's assume the user is searching for a character they know is named "Peter" from Fringe but doesn't know their last name. They will type in "peter fringe". That will land them on the search page (at least presently) where the first hit is the episode, the second the character, and third the TV series. Now, if they can't be bothered to read the short description under the search result, they will hit the first link - the episode - and find its not about the character. At which point they will see the hatnote, and click correctly.  That will be the case whether the page is at "Peter (Fringe)" or "Peter (Fringe episode)". So the further terms on the disamb. title is not going to help anything beyond make the title longer, which is cautioned against in article naming for disambiguation. --M asem  (t) 17:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * To add, I do not read the NCTV guidelines on naming to follow this. If we only knew Peter Bishop as "Peter" (no last name ever given), such that he would be at "Peter (Fringe character)" then there's an argument that "Peter (episode)" should be at "Peter (Fringe episode)". (This on the basis that "Peter (character)" should be a redirect to the disamb page Peter to avoid confusion with characters like Peter Pan or Peter Rabbit). But this is not the case. Peter's character article is at the full name, so there's no conflict with the episode. --M asem (t) 17:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well then you are reading it wrong, this is exactly what the guideline says. Your argument that there are only "two possible pages" is just moot - the two pages is exactly the type of situation the guideline handles. Also, your arguments show you either didn't read the guideline or don't care about it. "Peter (episode)" and "Peter (character)" are both incorrect disambiguation that aren't supported by the guideline. It clearly says to use the series in the disambiguation. --Gonnym (talk) 19:19, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The specific language in NCTV would apply only if the episode was named "Peter Bishop" exactly matching the name of the character. We don't have that exact match here, there's no need to complicate the situation with additional disambig terms. As long as that that exact match doesn't exist, there's no conflict with NCTV.
 * While we do avoid "(episode)" as a solitary disambiguation term in favor of the series name, the use of "(character)" is pretty common through WP for disambiguation, at least outside of the TV project. I argue it should not be used for this Peter due to the number of other well known Peter characters (if anything "Peter (character)" would be a disambiguation page itself for fictional characters named Peter). --M asem (t) 19:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. The redirects should then point to the disambiguation page per WP:INCDAB and the results of the previous RMs cited by the nominator. Iffy★Chat -- 12:17, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Support, and redirect them to the characters. Both episodes are named after the characters and therefore, they are the primary topics. Tbsock (Tbhotch away) (talk) 17:43, 28 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.