Talk:Batavia

message: I believe that Batavia needs to link directly to a dab page, not to History of Jakarta, as it does presently.  Now this is what I see:
*A great many of the links for Batavia--perhaps even a majority of them--do, indeed, refer to the colonial name of Jakarta.
*However, redirect decisions are not made based upon the number of links, but rather, on the principle of least astonishment. So the question is, what does the average person expect to see when he types in "Batavia"?
*99% of the current world's population was not born when Jakarta went by the name "Batavia".  So it is not, in my opinion, fair to presume that the colonial capital is what most people are looking for.  
Yes, as I said, a lot of links have been created to go to History of Jakarta, but those links were created by people who have an interest in Indonesian history.  But someone interested in just Roman history--and there will be a lot of those, may be thinking about this.  Someone interested in American history may be looking for this (or even this).  And it's not just about those with an interest in history.  Someone interested in particle physics is quite possibly looking for this.  Heck, look at this user page.  Do you think she means Jakarta?  
I would suggest that there are thousands more people who, when they think of Batavia, think of one of these other uses.  So I decided, a few weeks back, to look at views, and I found the following views in January 2011 for the following Batavias:
*Batavian Republic had 8513 views (actually used December 2010 figures, since it got 17,500 views when it was listed on the Main Page in "On this day" for January 19, 2011).
*Batavia_(ship) had 7677 views.
*Batavia_(city),_New_York had 4073 views.
*History of Jakarta had 3132 views.
*Batavia, Illinois had 2731 views.
*Batavia_(town),_New_York had 386 views.
*Batavia, Suriname  had 167 views.
*Batavia,_Iowa had 166 views.
Note that, even with over 350 pages containing redirects from Batavia to History of Jakarta, and another 100+ pages redirecting there via Batavia, Dutch East Indies, that it was still only #4 in views.  My point is that it is probably a somewhat insular community of people who share an interest in Indonesia history who think the that natural thing is to make the default link from Batavia go to History of Jakarta, or for that matter, anything related to that town.  In other words, there are over 500 articles linking to History of Jakarta (including some that actually do not intend to link there), and it still lags far behind the leading article in views.
Looks like a case of boldness is called for. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is a good idea to link to the disembarkation page of Batavia instead. --Shorty23sin (talk) 09:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I second the motion. Peter Horn User talk 16:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Batavia belongs here 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support; I don't think any one use is primary.  Powers T 21:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: *Question:. It was the assumption that the most common use was for colonial Jakarta that led to the former redirect to History of Jakarta.  I have presented significant evidence above why I believe that assumption is incorrect.  On what basis do you base your belief that most readers are thinking of the city in Indonesia? HuskyHuskie (talk) 04:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Indonesia was never referred to as Batavia. Jakarta was. While we all get things wrong, at least get the very basic facts correct before you post your recommendation. --Merbabu (talk) 21:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I used this tool to locate the editors who have worked on ALL the articles that link to this dab page.  I then left the following message on the top three editors (in terms of edit counts), with the exceptions of anon IP editors, blocked editors, and editors who, despite being one of the top three editors, had only a single edit to the article.  If anyone finds this posting to be non-neutral, let me know, but frankly, I don't see how much more neutral I could have made it:
Opportunity to comment on Batavia
There is a discussion starting up at Talk:Batavia (disambiguation), that may be of interest to you.  The subject is technically a page move discussion, but the purpose of the discussion is to decide where Batavia should redirect.  Until earlier today, Batavia redirected to History of Jakarta, but during this discussion, it is redirecting to Batavia (disambiguation).  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.  
Thanks for your help. HuskyHuskie (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI- Someone forgot to redirect Talk:Batavia to this talk page. It was still pointing to Talk:History of Jakarta. Don't forget to update that too when this is moved again. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notification