Category talk:Disambiguation pages

There will always be tons of features with the same names so I'd recommend we don't create disambiguations until we have content for two things named the same. Basically, a disambiguation page should never contain just one blue link. Following that strategy keeps the infrastructure work load down while there is less content (work on content is more valuable than work on infrastructure), and it maintains as much simplicity as possible as long as possible. --Bjp (talk) 13:20, 13 May 2014 (PDT)

In the same vein, do you prefer not to add new regions/canyons unless there is content for them? For example, establishing a new region and listing its canyons, but without creating the canyon betas. —Bahman (talk) 13:32, 13 May 2014 (PDT)

If we have nothing, yes, I'd say we shouldn't create the pages. But, even if we just have one set of coordinates, that's pretty valuable and I'd still add them at that point (which would prompt creating disambiguation pages for conflicting names) if we expected the beta to be useful at some point in the future. If, for instance, the other Salmon Creek Falls were just little local 10ft attractions with no canyoneering potential, we're not likely to create beta for them in the future so we probably don't want to bother increasing the complexity of the name for the main Salmon Creek Falls that pretty much everyone would be looking for. But no hard rules -- just pick the strategy you think is best for a particular case, or that we've come to consensus on generally. Bjp (talk) 13:38, 13 May 2014 (PDT)

To clarify, should the naming convention (w/ parenthetical descriptors) still be observed regardless? That is, even without other pages with the same name, should the first page's name contain the proper qualifiers? —Bahman (talk) 13:44, 13 May 2014 (PDT)

I think the qualifiers should be omitted whenever practical. It's not possible when there are two things with the same name, when the name would be ambiguous without the qualifiers, etc. It's not practical if additional beta with the same name is expected "imminently". Like everything, it's a judgment call. But I think the easiest call to make is that we don't want disambiguation pages with only one blue link unless we expect someone to fill in one of the red links "soon". --Bjp (talk) 14:53, 13 May 2014 (PDT)