Steve Bennett wrote:
On 17/04/06, Justin Cormack justin@specialbusservice.com wrote:
I would find it very odd that something named after something else should ever get priority.
However obscure the original is, like Camembert, or Jethro Tull, I think it should be at the article place. (Actually Jethro Tull is now a dab page).
Ok, so you're in favour of us making a judgment about which page "deserves" the title as the main article? Personally, I feel that this is the more "encyclopaedic" road. The alternative, prioritising the page that most visitors/editors visit/expect, is the more "pragmatic" road.
To me, the fact that "Camembert" pulls up a stub article on an entirely unremarkable commune in France is surprising. Perhaps a similar surprise to that that would be experienced by Americans visiting "Georgia" and finding the birthplace of Stalin. The question is, is this surprise good or bad?
Alternatively put, is Wikipedia bound by the principle of least surprise?
The conflict does not simply lie in that principle, but in the fact that not all people will be surprised in the same way.
Ec