Talk:Hall of the Mountain King (album)

message: Is Edvard Grieg chopped liver!?!?!?  A disambiguation page is sorely required... never done one, must study Tim Bray 07:51, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Chopped liver?

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
Hall of the Mountain King (album) → Hall of the Mountain King — hatnote takes care of the people who meant to go to In the Hall of the Mountain King —JHunterJ 12:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
This article has been renamed  as the result of a move request. There is no other article titled "Hall of the Mountain King", and a hatlink will direct people to In the Hall of the Mountain King without any problems. --Stemonitis 06:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move May 2007

message: Here's an alternative suggestion: what about making Hall of the Mountain King a disambiguation page, pointing to (let's say) In the Hall of the Mountain King and Hall of the Mountain King (album)? Tim Pierce 15:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The restoration from (album) back to the basename was already handled above in "Requested move May 2007".  A disambiguation page would serve exactly the purpose of the current hatnote, with the added drawback that no reader would reach the intended page without an addition click.  As before, since the two works have different titles, each can have the article at their respective base names, since those are the primary uses, and the people reaching the wrong page because of an informal or abbreviated title can easily click through the hatnote to reach the article desired. Since there are two similar titles, you could make a case for Hall of the Mountain King (disambiguation) (as opposed to either base name), but how would the reader reach it? -- JHunterJ 02:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A disambiguation page would also have the advantage of not appearing to favor one reference over the other.  Speaking only for myself, I was startled and kind of shocked when I searched Wikipedia last week for "Hall of the Mountain King" and found myself on what seemed to be a very wrong entry.  Finding a hatnote at the top of the page allowed me to find the article I was looking for, but did not much help my sense that Wikipedia's has prioritized the wrong subject.  Given the amount of confusion over this particular issue, I think that a disambiguation page would be the most neutral solution. Tim Pierce 11:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that it's solving a non-problem. Wikipedia doesn't prioritize on the basis of importance, it (neutrally) prioritizes on primary usage, and the discussions above have illustrated the primary topic in this case.  So "In the Hall of the Mountain King" can be found at In the Hall of the Mountain King and Hall of the Mountain King at Hall of the Mountain King. The confusion over this issue ends at those two points, which isn't much confusion at all. Similarly, Andy Griffiths is not a disambiguation page, even though some people might think that's the name of the more important Andy Griffith. -- JHunterJ 02:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with JHunterJ. I mean absolute no disrespect by this, but if you didn't knew the proper title (which seems to be implied in the discussion topic above), then you could have searched for "Hall of the Mountain King". 05:09, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambig page? 

message: It would be nice to see the album's concept plot in the page. I added a review that contains it as an external link, but I'm not sure it's correct or if the author took creative liberty.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.82.170.208 (talk • contribs) 05:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story 

message: It lists Clay Melton as one of the professional reviews. This is a completely biased review as it was commissioned by the band and featured on the band's official website, let alone uses insider knowledge to paint a picture of the album. This review does not follow wikipedia's guide for reviews re: it's not unbiased or by a source independent of the artist. Further, even if it is an independent review, the band has chosen to list only this reviewer on their website as the "official band review", versus the common approach of a page of all reviews and press, good and bad. Actually, many of the Savatage albums either list Clay Melton or Jim Gordon, but both link to the same official band website and neither should be included as professional reviews. Particularly, as reading the reviews one will find that they include insider information about the making of the albums.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.113.160 (talk) 21:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  unbiased professional review