Talk:John H. Collins

Double disambiguation pages

@Onel5969: Usually, when there is a page such as John Collins, another dab page for those named John H. Collins is not needed; they should just be added to that page. Otherwise, we’d have all kinds of dab pages, one for every initial that is shared. Why do you insist on keeping this a separate dab page instead of redirecting it to the already existing one? — Gorthian (talk) 00:39, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gorthian. Not sure you are correct in your assumption. Take a look at John C. Smith and John Smith, also John H. Smith, etc. As well as William A. Smith and William Smith. And those are the two I found in about five minutes. In this particular instance, since there are other pages for John Collins (director) in addition to the academic, I felt it was helpful to have this disambiguation. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Right, I have seen it done as one15969 says. Not sure if I have seen it the way that Gorthian suggests. However, on some level, so what. Some questions I would have would be:

• Is there a rule about this?
• If there isn't, is it done one way in the great majority of instances? This would create a de facto rule IMO. Since rules are supposed to mostly codify existing practice, you could write up a rule if that helped.
• If there isn't, is there one way that's better for the reader?
• Even if there is a rule or a general way of doing it, I'd still ask: what's best for the reader? If the best way is not the common practice, I'd consider doing it the best way anyway.

I dunno if there's an obvious best way tho. My opinion is that listing all the people in a flat list is less confusing (and FWIW saves a mouse click). OTOH the list is already pretty long to read thru. Herostratus (talk) 06:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't know if there's a rule as such, but this seems to be a question along the lines of "at what point should we split John Collins into more than one page?" Taking the lead of WP:SPLIT, one aspect concerns article size: is John Collins overlarge? Is that because of the number of people who have another name between "John" and "Collins"? Are the bulk of those people whose middle initial is H or whose middle name begins with H?

Coming from the other end, WP:MERGE also has a size aspect: is John H. Collins "very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time"? I may be wrong, but it seems to have just two entries. By comparison, John C. Smith has six entries; John H. Smith has ten; and William A. Smith has nine. I think that two is on the low side.

So, is it useful to split those two John H. Collins out from the main John Collins page? I think not: besides removing those two entries, you would then need to add a link to the See also section which points to the John H. Collins dab page, so in effect you have reduced the page size by just one line. Would it be detrimental to include those two John H. Collins in the main John Collins page? I think not: John H. Collins can be deleted or redirected back to John Collins (disambiguation). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Having "all kinds of dab pages" is not a problem. Someone looking for "John H. Collins" is unlikely to be looking for most of the entries on John Collins (disambiguation). The entries here would still remain on the "John Collins" page too; splitting them would also not help the readers. The disambiguation pages are navigational aids for the readers, and having them separate can better serve the reader, even if it makes more work for the editors. That's what we're here for. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't think there is hard and fast rule about this. Where the main page (John Collins) is very long, it may be helpful for the sub-page (John H. Collins) for readers specifically looking for person with the middle initial "H". However, problems can quickly arise as it is difficult to know with certainty whether any of the other persons listed at John Collins might also have the middle initial but use a different disambiguation. And unless the person is ALWAYS referred to with the middle initial, it may be difficult for a reader to find the John H. Collins they want if they are not all listed at the main page. As such, if the sub-page exists, 1) the sub-page should contain a link back to the main dab page; and 2) the main dab page should contain all of the entries at the sub-page. older ≠ wiser 14:05, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I couldn’t find anything in the guidance for this, so it’s good to hear all the different approaches. Every one has good arguments, but I especially like the last two points made by older ≠ wiser. — Gorthian (talk) 23:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Things like John H. Collins should in most cases be either a {{hndis}} page or a redirect to a page such as John Collins with an {{R from incomplete disambiguation}} tag. Narky Blert (talk) 03:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

I personally prefer the R from incomplete disambiguation solution. I have more than once seen a bad link to a page called something like John H. Collins when the link should have been to a John H. Collins who was listed on the {{hndis}} page John Collins, but who was not mentioned on the hndis page John H. Collins.

It's even worse when the John H. Collins in question is on neither page, and may not even be notable. Problems like that can take a lot of head-scratching and research to sort out. Narky Blert (talk) 03:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)