Talk:St. Louis Blues (disambiguation)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Earlier discussion can be found at Talk:St._Louis_Blues_(hockey).

IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ Talk:St. Louis Blues (hockey).

Background

 * 1) 18:30, 27 Jul 2001 . . 63.208.41.xxx created Saint Louis Blues stub about the NHL team.
 * 2) 15:51, 25 Feb 2002 . . Conversion script redirected St. Louis Blues to Saint Louis Blues.
 * 3) 10:20, 15 May 2002 . . Ortolan88 showed first bias "*put the song in, ahead of the hockey team, remove repetitive xrefs."
 * 4) 01:01, 26 May 2003 . . Kirjtc2 "introduced standard hockey team template. I also moved the music article to the bottom - it looks like more pages link to it referring to hockey than the music".
 * 5) 18:36, 3 Jul 2003 . . Kirjtc2 redirected Saint Louis Blues to St. Louis Blues.
 * 6) 17:06, 19 Mar 2004 . . 24.217.219.69 moved the music article from bottom of St. Louis Blues to 'Saint Louis Blues'.
 * 7) 20:10, 23 Mar 2004 . . Infrogmation moved St. Louis Blues to St. Louis Blues (hockey). At this time St. Louis Blues redirects to St. Louis Blues (hockey), but Infrogmation still was not satisfied...
 * 8) 20:34, 23 Mar 2004 . . Infrogmation changed redirect to Saint Louis Blues, and DECLARES AN EDIT WAR!

Should the new St. Louis Blues (hockey) be moved back to original St. Louis Blues for consistency and fairness with all National Hockey League teams?


 * Heh, I will only comment on this to deny anon's accusation that I have "Declared an edit war". My earlier version of the discussion question, for the record, had been "Should St. Louis Blues be a disambiguation page, or should it be the location for the St. Louis Blues (hockey) article, as it was previously? Other options? " -- non war declaring Infrogmation 22:56, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Support

 * 24.217.211.99 04:45, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Kirjtc2 18:44, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * --Djsasso 21:26, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

 * Infrogmation 22:22, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Moriori 04:30, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Decumanus | Talk 04:31, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Michael Snow 21:47, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * jredmond 17:47, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Cambyses 04:28, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * BCorr | &#1041;&#1088;&#1072;&#1081;&#1077;&#1085; 02:37, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

Support

 * Infrogmation 22:22, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Moriori 04:30, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Decumanus | Talk 04:31, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Michael Snow 21:47, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * jredmond 17:48, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Cambyses 04:28, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 24.217.211.99 04:45, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Kirjtc2 18:44, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Comments
I am not so sure any votes of jredmond should count, as he is in a questionable partnership with Infrogmation. 24.217.211.99 06:09, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * On the relevant talk page, Infrogmation asked for help disambiguating (in mid-March, I might add). I helped him, and he thanked me on my user talk page.  How exactly does that constitute a "questionable partnership"? - jredmond 16:26, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

So Infrogmation asks for help, and you automatically help him without hesitation. Here, let me try:


 * I am requesting that St. Louis Blues (hockey) be moved to St. Louis Blues as I am not a Administrator (help in this is welcome). -- 24.217.211.99 05:36, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I helped him "without hesitation" because


 * there had been discussion on the relevant talk page
 * he was already starting
 * disambiguating is tedious
 * disambiguating directs those who follow links to the appropriate article without having to pass them through any disambiguation page, and therefore makes the 'pedia more useful for everybody
 * Oh yeah. The malice just oozes from my every pore.  Listen to me cackle. - jredmond 15:17, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't understand why this is all that difficult an issue. The treatment of other National Hockey League teams is irrelevant, because none of them require disambiguation that I know of. If the term standing alone is ambiguous, it needs to be disambiguated, regardless of the naming convention for other similar terms. And anybody trying to get either the hockey team, the movie, or the music, will not necessarily know or care whether they should be typing in "St. Louis" or "Saint Louis". --Michael Snow 21:47, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * This is not that difficult of an issue. Have you seen ? The disambiguation at the top of St. Louis Blues (hockey) is well within Disambiguation policy. --24.217.211.99 05:20, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Correct. We would compromise Wiki's style integrity. We are discussing the consistency of an international encylopedia, not a spurious "fairness" for a US sports team. I know about and admire the music style called blues from St Louis, and the tune/song called Saint Louis Blues. I am aware there was a movie called Saint Louis Blues. I don't live in St Louis, or the US, and have never heard of St Louis Blues ice hockey team. I'd bet most English speaking people have much the same awareness as I have. In an international pedia it is logical and desirable to have a disamb page rather than route straight to an ice hockey team.  Wikipedia follows consistent style when dealing with Hockey. It quite rightly doesn't route to either Ice Hockey or Field Hockey but to a disamb page. St Louis Blues must do the same to maintain the integrity of wiki. Moriori 22:00, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)


 * We would not compromise anything per Disambiguation. By spurious fairness, you mean all other National Hockey League teams are better because they do not require your "(hockey)"? If you did live in St. Louis, or were a National Hockey League fan, you would almost certainly have heard of St. Louis Blues Hockey. Again, there already is a disambiguation page at Saint Louis Blues, yet you insist on another at St. Louis Blues. 24.217.211.99 05:02, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * But I do live in St. Louis, I am a Blues fan, I'm exposed to all the team's advertising and news reports and associated hype, and I'm sitting here typing this a scant 3 blocks from the Savvis Center while discussing last night's playoff game with a co-worker. And I still want to put the hockey team at St. Louis Blues (hockey), and I still don't think that the "(hockey)" qualifier is unfair in any way to the Blues franchise.


 * Also, if you'd notice, St. Louis Blues redirects to Saint Louis Blues, and St. Louis Blues Hockey redirects to St. Louis Blues (hockey). Please check your links before arguing about their content.


 * And I was able to find another extant professional sports franchise with a qualifier - the Chicago Fire of Major League Soccer. No troubles on that article, on its disambiguation page, or on any other MLS articles. - jredmond 15:17, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * The issue is, for almost three full years there were no troubles on St. Louis Blues as originally an exclusive stub about the NHL team, and later as a disambiguation page per Disambiguation.


 * The Wikipedia evolves, my friend. That's why we have articles now on the song, the movie, and the style of music, even though we didn't in 2001, and why the article on the hockey team is no longer a puny stub.  Nobody complained because they were too busy fixing stuff.


 * And the link that you're fond of quoting indicates that "if the title clearly has one central most important meaning, and one or two lesser-known meanings in narrow contexts, it is probably better to have the full article about the primary meaning under the simple title". To suggest that the hockey team is more important than the song or the movie or the style of music is rather POV; that's why Ortolan et al. added references to the song to begin with. - jredmond 20:36, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, I understand the current redirects, but this is only as recent as 20:34, 23 Mar 2004 and 20:35, 23 Mar 2004.


 * ...right about the time the issue was discussed in Talk:St. Louis Blues (hockey). - jredmond 20:36, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * The difference is, Chicago Fire was originally an exclusive stub about the Major League Soccer team for approximately 2 1/2 hours before Infrogmation moved it to Chicago Fire (soccer) and created a disambiguation.
 * 24.217.211.99 18:20, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Another difference is that nobody else has seen fit to complain about or unilaterally revert Chicago Fire, even after nearly a year, because they agree that there's tremendous chance for confusion between the team and the event, that creating a disambig page reduces that confusion, and that the team is not slighted in any way by the parenthetical qualifier.


 * Since your IP indicates you're a local boy, I'll put it another way. Imagine the football Cardinals had stayed in St. Louis.  Would it be "unfair" to either team to name their articles St. Louis Cardinals (baseball) and St. Louis Cardinals (football) and put a disambiguation page at St. Louis Cardinals?    Or would it be clearer and more accurate to put the baseball team at St. Louis Cardinals and put the "(football)" qualifier on the football team, since after all more people care about baseball in this town? - jredmond 20:36, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Do a search on Google. 39 of the first 50 hits for "St. Louis Blues" reference the hockey team. Meanwhile, substantially more links for "Saint Louis Blues" are about the music genre. With that in mind, would it not make sense for St. Louis Blues to be about the hockey team, Saint Louis Blues to be about music, and have a disamb link to each other at the top of the page? Kirjtc2 18:53, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)