On 4/12/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Imagine, for example that instead of a 60-60 on the poll, the result had been 40-80. Or, it had been advertised on other Wikipedias (as if it mattered that much). Or something.
Which is why I believe my personal policy of "if there's any controversy at all, make the primary name a disambiguation page" is the correct one. Otherwise, we are choosing a bias to agree with; we're telling one bunch of people "Your bias that your one is the more important is correct" and the other bunch of people "Your bias that your one is the more important is WRONG". I think that's a poor message to be sending and goes against the Neutral Point of View policy.
There are all kinds of ways that article names can convey a bias, but this is one that we're better off avoiding. And I think quoting the NPOV principle in these cases is the way to go, and to emphasise that putting all articles at an equal footing is NOT saying they're equal: it's saying that Wikipedia does not, as editorial policy, take sides on that dispute.
-Matt