Talk:Steven Milne

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Football: England / Scotland Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Scottish football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Move?

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. We have consensus the parentheses are serving no purpose, and that disambiguation can be served with the hat notes. Cúchullain ^t/c 03:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason for the page to be at a disambiguated title, as there are no other articles named Steven Milne. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Stephen" and "Steven" are easily confused with each other. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:26, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, but that's what you have a hatnote for. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A reader won't see a hatnote until they open an article, which will obviously sometimes be the wrong one. The present arrangement means they won't open the wrong article. Obviously better for all. HiLo48 (talk) 22:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NCDAB: "Natural disambiguation is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation; for instance mechanical fan and hand fan are used instead of fan (mechanical) and fan (implement). If natural disambiguation is not available, a parenthetical is used." In this case, natural disambiguation is available, because the Scottish footballer is called Steven, whereas the Aussie Rules footballer is called Stephen. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NATURAL states that "Parenthetical disambiguation: If natural disambiguation is not possible, add a disambiguating term in parentheses, after the ambiguous name." Again, natural disambiguation is possible, with parentheses only to be used in case it is not. The presumption of the policy is clearly against using parentheses wherever possible. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:28, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from the city where Stephen Milne plays football. Before you mentioned it here, I couldn't have told you how he spelt his name. I don't think the spelling is a very effective natural disambiguation. (Maybe Scottish fans are smarter.) HiLo48 (talk) 08:08, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The policies and guidelines don't mention whether the natural disambiguation is effective. The guidelines say if natural disambiguation is available or possible, it should be used in preference to using parentheses. In this case, natural disambiguation is available and possible. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I always wonder about someone's real motives when they push a policy while virtually admitting it may not be effective. Why on earth would you change something that obviously works to something that probably won't? I'd like a rational answer, not one that begins "Policy says..." I'd suggest that WP:IAR could apply here. HiLo48 (talk) 09:53, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it would be effective, since there are only two articles named Steven / Stephen / Steve Milne, per WP:2DABS. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since those proposed renames already redirect, what is the point of keeping them at a name with paranthetical disambiguation? These are not disambiguation pages! Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:19, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support moves for both with a hatnote between the two, similar to Dave Moyes and David Moyes. Giant Snowman 20:40, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing rational responses to my comments. HiLo48 (talk) 22:22, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing you citing any policy or guideline that justifies using parentheses in this case. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:42, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then you're not paying attention. I mentioned WP:IAR where I am advised "If the rules prevent you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore them", and "Use your common sense over anything else". It's simple. The spelling alone doesn't work, at least for me, and I'm pretty good at spelling. I am absolutely certain that it won't work for a lot of other people. HiLo48 (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2014 (UTC)A[reply]

Look, the reason you moved Steven Milne (footballer) to Steven Milne (Scottish footballer) is that the former page offended your sensibility that Aussie Rule football is known as football in the part of Australia you live in. When doing this, you missed the more obvious solution, which is to remove parentheses in both cases. No one likes being told they were wrong, but citing IAR is pretty desperate. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit. The spelling is not an effective disambiguation. HiLo48 (talk) 07:50, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HiLo48's contention is that using the parentheses aids people who type in the wrong spelling of Stephen, i.e. they type in Steven Milne when looking for the Aussie Rules footballer, or they type in Stephen Milne when looking for the Scottish footballer. The problem with this theory is that if you type in "steven milne" into the search box, the only prompted result is "Steven Milne (Scottish footballer)". Given that you were looking for the Australian, this isn't much use. You might think "oh, maybe it's the other spelling of Stephen / Steven", but you might also think that there isn't an article about the Australian at all. Whereas if the pages were at their natural titles, someone typing in Steven Milne would land directly on the Scottish footballer. They would then read the hatnote at the top of his article directing them to the Australian. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit again. Typing the name works perfectly for me. When I get it wrong, it's obvious from what I see in parentheses, so I just backspace a few times and type in the right spelling, without ever opening the wrong article. HiLo48 (talk) 02:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That may be fine for you and your "bullshit" detector, but what about everyone else? The reason they would have typed the wrong spelling in the first place is that they (incorrectly) believed that the name was spelt that way. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What? Your objections to what I have said make no sense. HiLo48 (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support both - They have different names. There is no need for a parenthetical disambiguator. – Pee Jay 23:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - WP:NATURAL states that "Parenthetical disambiguation: If natural disambiguation is not possible, add a disambiguating term in parentheses, after the ambiguous name." as Anthony Appleyard says above, Steven Milne/Stephen Milne are easily confused ie. they are ambiguous. Therefore this move would not be a disambiguation, but an 'ambiguation'. Also, when these particular WP:FOOTBALL editors are all together block !voting for something it is usually a fairly reliable bellwether that they are wrong. Clavdia chauchat (talk) 00:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Anthony Appleyard was reasoning why this discussion was being created, rather than moving the pages under a technical request. I know this isn't a deletion discussion, but WP:TDLI applies to the second part of your statement. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - their names are different so don't require disambiguation. Any potential confusion should be dealt with by a hatnote - as that is what they are for. Bladeboy1889 (talk) 13:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why force people to open the articles, when the current names don't? HiLo48 (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I am intrigued with how we can have a consensus that defies reality. At 02:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC) above I said that the parentheses work perfectly for me. It's a simple fact. Others may not work that way, but it works for me. The closing Admin's statement says "We have consensus the parentheses are serving no purpose". LOL. You can have a consensus over a matter of opinion, but not over a fact. Stupid. Administrators should have to pass a clear thinking and logic test before they get the gig. HiLo48 (talk) 09:11, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]