Talk:Richmond

message: Should these perhaps be sorted by country? There are quite a few places and it would seem better organized if the ones in each country were grouped together --- BRG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.26.98.90 (talk) 07:30, 26 July 2002 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been done. Kevyn 00:41, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Organize by country

message: Perhaps it should automatically go to Richmond Virginia, since that is probably the largest and most popular of these places.  Note: I'm NPOV on this, I'm not from Richmond Virginia, or even anywhere near there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TotallyTempo (talk • contribs) 23:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Within the US, this would make sense. However, I do recall that British people think of THEIR Richmond when they hear the name, and same for Australians. Since it seems so dependent on geography, I think keeping it as a disambig. page would make sense. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 00:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Google test Richmond, and then Richmond, VA means ~25% of all Richmond web pages share Virginia.  Richmond is a global city ala Atlanta... --M a s 16:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think so. Never heard of it, but I've heard of Atlanta. 129.31.72.52 22:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow I'm sorry 129.  I should've been a little more clear.  I shoulda linked to global city.  Richmond, VIRGINIA is on the list from '99, no other Richmond's are.  --M a s 12:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Richmond Virginia

message: There have been some contradictory edits here recently, so I think we need to develop a consensus:
# I (accidentally editing anonymously) promoted the orginal Richmond to the top of the article, because I felt the 'lede' gave an incorrect impression that the name originated with the Richmond near London.
# DaveK@BTC reverted this change with the comment Previous version more correct. Richmond, Yorkshire inspired name of Richmond, Surrey (as was) but Richmond, Surrey inspired names worldwide, which statement is true, but isn't the impression the article previously gave.
# I thought that the best way to deal with this was with more description, so I tried to put DaveK's words into context in the lede.
# Raime reverted this change with the comment rv; per WP:MOSDAB, the purpose of a dab page is to allow readers to easily access articles; a detailed history of the term "Richmond" does not assist in this process.
Clearly DaveK and Raime have quite different views as to what this page should say. Having read WP:MOSDAB, I tend to agree with Raime. But the problem is that the article already fell between two stools by trying to tell the story of the name, and doing a not very good job. And Raime's reversion has put it back to that state. And that is no benefit.
So either we go with WP:MOSDAB and turn this page into a vanilla dab page with no attempt to tell any story about the name. Or we turn it into an article about the name. What do you think:
* Vanilla dab page - because that is what WP:MOSDAB says - Starbois (talk) 10:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But the job of a dab page is to easily allow a reader to get to the page he/she was looking for; adding information and/or references about which Richmond is the oldest doesn't help in that process. As I stated above, I would not opposed to replacing the statement at the header of the Places subsection, but I still think such information it is better served in an article. Cheers, Rai•me 19:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Format of page