Talk:Plymouth (disambiguation)

message: With only two places outside of the United States named Plymouth (besides the original that should be linked at the beginning) versus the dozens of U.S. places, it makes sense to group and order them "in the U.S." and "outside the U.S.".  Sections with only a single listing look odd and illogical. -Acjelen 14:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure.  It is a town.  In WP, paranthetical qualifiers are usually used when more than one subject can have the same title, but the article Plymouth, Massachusetts is a redirect to this article. -Acjelen 14:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a differentiation between the Census-Designated Place within the large town of Plymouth (namely downtown and historic Plymouth) as compared to the very large town of Plymouth, Massachusetts itself (comprising several CDPs). Raime 04:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening comments 

message: Shouldn't this town, one of the first in the modern-day United States, the site of many American landmarks, and the location of several historic events, be listed prominetly at the top of the page along with Plymouth, Devon? Raime 04:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily. The historical significance of the place is covered in several related articles and are not necessarily served by forwarding a link to the article about the current town. older ≠ wiser 16:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. The current town remains extremely important, and nearly all related articles are covered in the town's article. It is by far more prominent than any other Plymouth listed under 'towns in the United States' named Plymouth. The importantce did lie in the town of Plymouth, not Plymouth colony in general, and the importance remains today. It should be listed prominently at the top of the page. Raime 01:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plymouth,  Massachusetts 

message: Moving this discussion so that the survey doesn't get too cluttered (although that horse has probably bolted already). Plymouth Colony and Jamestown are not comparable. Jamestown refers to a settlement within Virginia Colony. The Jamestown article refers to it simply as Jamestown whereas the Plymouth Colony article doesn't even list Plymouth as sutable alternative. Colony is not a qualifier but part of its name. Plymouth was not the capital of Plymouth it was the capital of Plymouth Colony. I seriously doubt anyone even refers to the colony as Plymouth because of confusion with its capital but then its up to you that Plymouth Colony is refered to simply as Plymouth. 87.114.19.66 (talk) 13:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Plymouth Colony is known widely across the U.S. as "Plymouth", and that is all that matters here. It is the Plymouth Colony article - not the Plymouth, Massachusetts article - that covers the landing of the Pilgrims, the First Thanksgiving, etc. in great detail, and this is what American readers expect when typing in Plymouth. IMO, your "serious doubt" is wrong - readers from outside of New England will likely be unfamiliar with the modern town, and will associate "Plymouth" only with the colony. Thus, it doesn't matter at all that the "Plymouth Colony article doesn't even list Plymouth as suitable alternative", as long as readers refer to it as Plymouth, which is very much the case. You cannot definitely not ignore the 35,000 readers looking for Plymouth Colony when determining the primary topic of Plymouth. Cheers, Rai•me 15:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plymouth Colony

message: Let's move the auto brand to Plymouth (automobile), in the pattern of DeSoto (automobile). Then let's go ahead and make Plymouth into a dab page. There are far too many places named Plymouth for us to reasonably and satisfactorily decide which one gets primacy by dint of article name, and the heated discussion above clearly demonstrates we'll never get consensus if we carry on pushing in that direction. 
Also, let's all have a nice cup of tea and a sit down; there is far more fur flying here than the question merits. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The auto brand is already at Plymouth (automobile); therefore I'm not sure what the modification here is over the existing proposal? Shereth 23:21, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's inappropriate to break off to a new discussion at this point, and progress is being made.  Furthermore - the car make is already at the location you request - Plymouth (automobile).  Just let this go to term and see what happens.  Knepflerle (talk) 23:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Knepflerle, thanks for pointing out my error regarding the auto brand article's location, but please try to be a little less dismissive, scoldy, and patronising, won't you? We don't exclude others' relevant thoughts during the consensus-building process, eh? —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 14:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  You may not like what I said, but there is nothing uncivil whatsoever in what I said or how I said it. You can check this yourself with the list of points here.  If you have any further questions in this regard, feel free to leave a note at my talk page.  Best, Knepflerle (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A slightly modified proposal 

message: In light of the recent requested move, readers here may be interested in the outcome of a recent move of Weymouth to Weymouth, Dorset followed by disambiguation of links to Weymouth.  It turns out fully 40% (400 links) did not intend Weymouth, Dorset.  I am glad that Weymouth now is a disambiguation page, as it is guaranteed to accumulate more links needing disambiguation.  --Una Smith (talk) 08:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Dorset doesn't have a WikiProject. Jolly Janner (talk) 16:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It may get one.  It is a future Olympic Games venue.  Thorough disambiguation of links, rather than redirects that "fix" most links, will be in order.  --Una Smith (talk) 17:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Weymouth is much different. It is not a very big settlement and I live in England and have never even heard of it, and Plymouth is further away from me! If Plymouth does get moved to Plymouth, Devon, then I reccoment moving Boston to Boston, Massachuetes, since the city it was named after (Boston in Lincolnshire) is a similar size difference between Plymouth in US and UK. Bezuidenhout (talk) 12:26, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move dab page to ambiguous title 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Plymouth which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 05:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Irrespective of the move discussion on the Devon city, this page is poor. Plymouth Colony isn't even mentioned for instance.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 386 articles with the name Plymouth in them. Where do we draw the line? Also, does there appear to be some order in the way the articles are listed i.e. by number of hits perhaps? Jolly Ω Janner 13:08, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering Plymouth Colony is often referred to as just "Plymouth", I'd say the line ought to be drawn somewhere on the far side of Plymouth Colony.  =)  Powers T 14:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we include all the cars at list of Plymouth vehicles too? Jolly Ω Janner 14:29, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's guidance at WP:PTM  —SMALLJIM  15:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not very specific on the cut-off point for how many people should refer to the article as its name. It would appear as though Plymouth Colony should be included, based on the fact that some Americans call it that, but I know little about the car brands usage. If it's a popular car make referred to as "Plymouth" sometimes then sure. Also, Plymouth Argyle are referred to as "Plymouth" in English football... again, which side of the boundary does this lye? Jolly Ω Janner 16:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You know how WP is supposed to work by now, JJ! You consider the available guidance and take a view on what should be done. Then unless you consider it too minor an issue, you attempt to discuss it with others. Finally, you implement it; based on consensus if there was other input; or just do what you think is right if not. If appropriate it will be adjusted later by others following the same process.  —SMALLJIM  17:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep! Just waiting for some people with more knowledge on the car brand to come along to contribute their thoughts. Jolly Ω Janner 17:44, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Same is true for Argyle, they are commonly called "Plymouth" so should be here - just like they are at pilgrim (disambiguation)--Nilfanion (talk) 22:23, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Good so far. How about removing the car brand and town in MA in their respectice sections, as they are currently repeated twice? Also, remove the transport section? The car brand should be moved, the steam engine doesn't have an article and the ships aren't really transport. Could possibly move them to other uses? Jolly Ω Janner 14:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said, I followed the Cambridge example, where at least the settlements were repeated in the lists below. I assumed that since the recent change there was made by JHunterJ, who appears to know what he's doing, this is so that people who don't read headings get a second chance to find what they want. I didn't check further, but it seems like a sensible thing to do, so I left the cars one too. If I may, I'll leave the rest to you or someone else.  —SMALLJIM  15:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that that's sensible.  Also in other uses (maybe in the cause of transatlantic relations) I'm thinking it's worth putting in Plymouth Gin directly on this page under 'other uses'.  Reckon that's an example where 'Plymouth' might be used in isolation.  Cheers. Stevebritgimp (talk) 23:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I support JHunterJ's decision 100% on this Purplebackpack89 04:51, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Makes sense. Jolly Ω Janner 18:48, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can find no guidance on DAB to list articles. My reasoning goes like this - list articles must conform to the usual standards as normal articles (refs etc). Other DAB pages link to list articles (not just with name lists) without them being placed in the See also section. I have reinstated the section, as per precedent rather than guideline. Any thoughts? maybe WP:MOSDAB should detail this (similar to section on WP:DAB#Double disambiguation). As per my edit summary, I cleaned up the DAB slightly (see my edit summary), including a lookfrom to access all the other articles. As per discussion on most popular links at the top, are we agreed on them. I moved Plymouth Company down to the business section. If this is, in fact, a most popular topic (I do not know), please discuss or place back at top. Widefox (talk) 13:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. Moving Plymouth Company out of the leaders was OK - http://stats.grok.se/ shows that it's not visited anything like as often as the others. Might I suggest a few changes though? Firstly, the leading articles should probably be repeated in the relevant sections below, for the reasons I explained above, and approved by others. Then if we renamed ==Ships== as ==Transport== we could add List of Plymouth vehicles to it. We could also move Plymouth Township (disambiguation) under ===United States=== and scrap Barbican, Plymouth which doesn't really deserve its own entry. Those changes would leave ==See also== with just two very general entries, which seems appropriate.  —SMALLJIM  16:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with all points - done. ... Leading articles should be duplicated - oops, missed that discussion above - fixed. Transport heading is back (full circle to my original edit!). Widefox (talk) 16:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: Copied from Talk:Plymouth, where it seems to have been put due to some confusion: PamD 16:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress