Magnus Manske wrote:
Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
Another issue is performance. Perhaps we could help both of those issues by making a single link to a list page rather than a set of links. But what to call that list is tricky. Is isn't really "related pages" because they're only related lexigographically, not semantically. Perhaps it could be something like "Other 'Foo' pages".
One special case I could think of is that there are a lot of matching pages (like the mentioned "USS *" pages). The "Other 'foo' pages" link cuold go into effect if there are more than, say, seven other 'foo' pages. I'm not sure if the trouble of setting up Yet Another Special Page (tm) will pay off considering the expected short number of such pages (I think at the test wiki, with all the 'A' articles, "Atlas" and variants hit the top, with five pages or so, one of them a REDIRECT).
But Yet Another Special Page would be precisely wrong. It would function like a disambiguation page, but one not written by a human and featuring only a list. If we direct people to a special page through "Other 'Foo' pages", then that really should link to [[Foo (disambiguation)]]. As you say:
The feature was *not* intended to replace the disambiguation pages.
-- Toby