Talk:Jack Thompson

Disambiguating on the main topic because I don't believe there's that much reason to think one of these more noteworthy than another. The actor has roles in well-known movies, the football player was a Heisman Trophy candidate and high NFL draft choice. In fact, the attorney is possibly the least significant, but the perspective online is skewed because the issue is video games. --Michael Snow 05:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And Wikipedia shows its skewedness. Just look at Ate my balls. A Heisman is fairly significant, but they come yearly, and only a select few are really famous and highly publizied (like OJ Simpsons or Reggie Bush). JT the actor seems to be fairly low-key, with not huge roles or star billing on his parts. JT the attorney, however, is the flamethrower, rising to prominence with his baseless attacks and attempting suings of everybody. I personally believe that most people will look for JT the attorney when searching on WP. - Hbdragon88 06:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact that Wikipedia sometimes gets skewed because it happens to be online doesn't mean that it should be. The attorney is basically known only in a segment of the gaming community. You seem to be overestimating his prominence because you happen to know about him. The actor is known to a segment of film buffs, the athlete is known to a segment of football fans. Prioritizing the attorney over the others amounts to saying that video games are more important than other forms of entertainment. --Michael Snow 18:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - You make a good point. While disambig pages are to be avoided when unneccesary, in this case... there are two other Jack Thompsons, and unless the likely search (we can only guess) for both combined come to a lot less than the attorney alone, the disambig page makes sense. Herostratus 19:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Well, it looks like someone dabbed it anyway and pointed "Jack Thompson" to the attorney instead of as a dab page. - Hbdragon88 05:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Which was a mistake, and has now been undone. As several Australian editors have now pointed out, the actor is fairly well known there while the attorney is completely unknown. There is no primary topic that warrants being placed ahead of the others. --Michael Snow 15:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I wasn't disagreeing with you, just noting it. Of course, I would like to see this page moved back without the (diambiguation) thing at the end of it. - Hbdragon88 18:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]