Trusted
25,398
edits
More actions
→Rename Article "Queen Victoria"
(→Rename Article "Queen Victoria": new section) Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I struggle to comprehend the rationale for titling this article simply "Victoria" and not "Queen Victoria." Look up any encyclopedic entry on Queen Victory, it will always be titled as "Queen Victoria;" the same should apply here as well. But if that's not enough reason to convince you, go and try to do a search for "Queen Victoria" right now, something which any person would type in when looking for information on this character in the DWU. She's the eighth result on the list, and people may not even be able to tell that this article is the one about the queen just by glancing at the search results. And that's to say nothing of the fact that casual fans who want to look for an article on the Second Doctor's companion Victoria but do not know her last name maybe brought to this article. I would say that the benefits to changing the name of this article far outweigh the drawbacks, but that kind of goes without saying because I honestly can't think of a single drawback. –[[User:Nahald|Nahald]] [[User talk:Nahald|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC) | I struggle to comprehend the rationale for titling this article simply "Victoria" and not "Queen Victoria." Look up any encyclopedic entry on Queen Victory, it will always be titled as "Queen Victoria;" the same should apply here as well. But if that's not enough reason to convince you, go and try to do a search for "Queen Victoria" right now, something which any person would type in when looking for information on this character in the DWU. She's the eighth result on the list, and people may not even be able to tell that this article is the one about the queen just by glancing at the search results. And that's to say nothing of the fact that casual fans who want to look for an article on the Second Doctor's companion Victoria but do not know her last name maybe brought to this article. I would say that the benefits to changing the name of this article far outweigh the drawbacks, but that kind of goes without saying because I honestly can't think of a single drawback. –[[User:Nahald|Nahald]] [[User talk:Nahald|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC) | ||
: All good points, although I just thought I'd point out that the ''reason'' she's at Victoria is the policy outlined at [[Tardis:Honourifics]]. Now, I'd also like to argue (in agreement with Nahald's arguments) that said policy also says, in the very first line, that: | |||
:: ''Honourifics are titles that come before a name, such as Mr, Mrs, Dr, Professor, religious ranks, or military ranks. These should generally not be included in article titles, '''unless they provide the only reasonable means of disambiguation.''''' ([[T:HONOUR]]) | |||
: Now as Nahald has already mentioned, using "Queen" here ''would'' be the only reasonable means of disambiguation, and she could hardly be considered a primary topic with the existence of [[Victoria Waterfield]], hence disambiguation should be considered necessary. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:17, 15 July 2021 (UTC) | |||