Michel Clasquin <clasqm(a)mweb.co.za> writes:
> You mean, just like [[Batman]]? The people working on Tolkien seem to be
> the only ones in a huff and a hurry about this.
Well, thats different.
Primarily, because Batman is a *the* main character in the franchise, and the
name of that franchise. If I use the proper noun "Batman", people know what
I'm talking about. There is no ambiguity. The question is not where do you
put [[Batman]], but where do you put [[Robin]]. Or [[Alfred]] (do you really
want the [[Alfred]] page to be an article about an English king with poor
culinary skills and and an article about Bruce Wayne's butler?
A link to both? What would you call the latter?
Similarly, whilst [[Bilbo Baggins]] is unproblematic, [[The Ring]] should
probably be an article about Wagner's operatic cycle.
Whereas [[Middle Earth/The Ring]] can tell us about its forging in Mount Doom,
its loss in Gladden Fields yadda, yadda, yadda.
The fact remains, that (modulo the auto-wikifying of GNU/Linux, which was a
bug not a feature), and when used for *disambiguation* rather than in any
hierarchical sense, SUBPAGES WORKED.
It continues to baffle me that some people seem to think
[[Alfred (Batman)]] is in somehow sense different from [[Batman/Alfred]]
(rather than just more difficult to type).
--
Gareth Owen
"Wikipedia does rock. By the count on the "brilliant prose" page, there
are 14 not-bad articles so far" -- Larry Sanger (12 Jan 2001)