Forum:Story names should be automatically disambiguated: Difference between revisions

[[Forum:Works with the same name and Discontinuity indexes]] has reminded me of an issue that really needs to be dealt with.  For the sake of not only {{tl|discontinuity}}, but every template that deals with page titles — as well as for the sanity of new users — we '''need''' to move to a standard nomenclature for all titles.  And given how many times I'm still finding things that need to be move from [[Story]] to [[Story (story type)]] names, I think we should just move every story page to a disambiguated name, leaving behind the redirect.

|style="Background-color:#ffc8c8;border-bottom:1px solid #b0b0b0;"| (episode), (television story), (television)<ref>If two different television series have stories of the same name, then disambiguate by using the prefix from [[Tardis:List of prefixes]].  For instance, if there were an SJA story named ''Inferno'', then it would be [[Inferno (SJA TV story)]] and the DW story would have to move to [[Inferno (DW TV story)]].    If two episodes of the ''same'' television series have the same noiame, then disambiguate by the year of initial broadcast. As of 2011, neither has really happened, though there have been some close calls with respect to [[William Hartnell]] episodes.  Still, if ''[[The Daleks]]'' were now known by its original production title of ''The Mutants'', then it would be [[The Mutants (1963 TV story)]] and the Jon Pertwee story would be [[The Mutants (1972 TV story)]]</ref>

|style="Background-color:#ffc8c8;border-bottom:1px solid #b0b0b0;"| Very rarely used, as most in-universe books, like ''[[A Christmas Carol]]'' have precedence, and therefore don't require disambiguation.  For example, if both the book and movie ''Casino Royale'' were discussed in the DWU, you'd have [[Casino Roayle (book)]] and [[Casino Royale (film)]].

as always with these huge technical shifts, I'm not asking anyone to spend any time actually doing the work that's implied by the change.  The bot will take care of everything quickly.  So please don't base your decision on whether you think it will be a lot of work.  It won't be.  Well, not for ''you'' anyway.   

'''Remember, even when it comes to typing in a story name, your job won't be any harder, because there will be a redirect from, say, [[Snakedance]] to [[Snakedane (TV story)]]].  So, however hard it is today to link to a story name is exactly how hard it will be to link to a story name under this plan.''''

Oh and incidentally, another side benefit of this is that it takes care of a flaw in the MediaWiki software which can occasionally create false redlinks in [[Special:WantedPages]]. So, if you rely on that page to edit, and some people do, then we can make all sorts of nifty templates without fear of cluttering up WantedPages. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''23:42:12 Wed&nbsp;'''13 Jul 2011&nbsp;</span>

:I think you're misunderstanding the benefit here.  It's not about differentiating '''from other media'''.  It's about differentiating from in-universe '''things'''.  Our current policy requires you to know that there is a thing called ''The Pandorica Opens'' or Paradise Towers, or Castrovalva within the DWU, in order to properly link to the story.  The cases where you need disambiguation are ''quite'' common, because stories are often titled around a concept within the episode.  You're talking about 30=40% of all stories ''need'' disambiguation.  (Whether they currently are disambiguated is a different matter.) {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">22:43: Sat&nbsp;01 Oct 2011&nbsp;</span>

:::Yeah, I just did a count of a single range, the [[BBC Past Doctor Adventures]], and that's running at 25% of the titles needing disambiguation.  That's too high a percentage, I think, to be managed on a case-by-case basis.  In fact the number would be even higher, save for some near misses, like ''[[Byzantium!]]'', which is saved from disambiguation only by an exclamation point.  And, technically, over half the television episodes need disambiguation because of the presence of a novelisation.  According to our disambig policy, we've no cause to preference the TV story over the novelisation in terms of disambiguation.  Two things with the same name in different media should ''both'' be disambiguated.  Yes, a lot of the early novelisations have the fomat ''Doctor Who and the . . . ''.  But a lot of novelisations have exactly the same name as the corresponding serial. I haven't done the actual count, but I feel certain that once you took into consideration novelisations ''and'' in-universe "things of the same name", over 50% of all classic series titles would need disambiguation. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">23:05: Sat&nbsp;01 Oct 2011&nbsp;</span>

There being no sustained objection in over six months, this policy change is deemed acceptable and is now being implemented.  It may take up to a week for all stories to be moved to [[dab|disambiguated]] names. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">04:56: Sat&nbsp;18 Feb 2012&nbsp;</span>