On Friday 12 July 2002 12:01 pm, : Karen AKA Kajikit wrote: I agree with Karen here. Since [[Sydney]] redirects to [[Sydney, Australia]] you still will be able to simply type [[Sydney]] and end up in the most famous Sydney. However, since [[Sydney]] redirects to the Australian city it is necessary to have the following statement at the top of that [[Sydney, Australia]]: "[[Sydney]] redirects here. There is also another article named [[Sydney, Nova Scotia]]." And if there were a long list of other, even less well know uses of the word "Sydney", then they would be in [[Sydney (disambiguation)]] and linked to after the above mention of the Nova Scotia city. This is called a disambiguation block and this form of disambiguation is useful in cases like this where a famous thing has the same name less famous things. Paris is an even more obvious example. All this has already been worked out to a great deal of detail here on the list and in about a dozen talk pages. More documentation can be found at: [[wikipedia talk:naming conventions (city names)]] and [[wikipedia:naming conventions]] BTW, it looks like Canada has systemic internal naming conflict issues with the [[City, Nation]] format and I am considering whether it would be a good idea to advocate moving Canada to the [[City, Province]] name format (similar to the USA) because of this (most of the Canadian cities are already in this format anyway). For example, there appears to be several significantly important places named Richmond in Canada. As for every country, whatever is decided should be internally consistant for that country (per the naming convention). --maveric149