Talk:Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation)

User:Francis Schonken created today a new disambig page at Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) and only a bit later he realized that there already exists another, essentially similar old disambig page Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom. When realizing that, Schonken started to fight against our GDFL terms. Schonken obviously wants to save his own creation and instead tries to have the old page merged into his creature (which will equal cut-and-paste move and will destroy the old page's edit history). I find his such conduct highly disruptive. The merger should be made to opposite direction: contents of the page Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) should be merged into the old disambig page Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom. Arrigo 23:18, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the disambiguation page here should be Princess Victoria, which should include all Queens, Princesses, ships, and other objects which might conceivably be known by this title. The title "Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom" is certainly not in everyday use in the UK, was it ever anyone's formal title? PatGallacher 01:35, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

At Princess Victoria, there is also a bunch of others than British princesses (and it may grow even bigger). IMO we need a disambig page for those approx four women who were Victorias of the United kingdom, i.e British princesses named Victoria. Several of our articles (up tp four) are named or may be named Victoria of the United Kingdom due to our NC. In order to avoid a disambig note (listing so many) in the beginning of articles, a separate page is needed. But that page should not be an overflow, and we know that all the world's princesses Victorias will be an overflow which defeats the purpose of having a navigational aid for those who seek British Victorias. I oppose merger between Princess Victoria (the general list) and British Victoria page. However, have I understood it correctly that you Pat are supporting that Francis Schonken's creation [1] should be merged somewhere. Arrigo 02:34, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The older page seems to me to be clearly badly titled, against both the general naming conventions (which would indicate the common name, which would be Princess Victoria) and the specific ones (royal titles, which would be Victoria of the United Kingdom). Thus it should be merged into one or the other, I'm not much bothered as to which. If the issue here is "whose" page is merged into "whose", then request an admin-assisted move to preserve the older history on the newer page. Alai 03:12, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If it is badly titled, just file a move request. Moving (instead of cut-and-pastes or other destructive means, or of duplicates) are the mandatory way to have the heading to be changed to the best possible... Arrigo 23:36, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The list of princesses under Princess Victoria is not so large as to be unmanageable, this is not a terribly common name, I think we've already got most of them. We could run into all sorts of problems if we try to split them by nationality or other criteria e.g. what about those who had more than one nationality during their lifetime? There is all sorts of potential for making a complicated issue even more complicated. Keep It Simple Stupid. We definitely need Victoria of the United Kingdom for Queen Victoria, the one everybody's heard of, in accordance with Wikipedia naming conventions, although the intro should include a redirect to Princess Victoria. Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom should be a redirect to Princess Victoria, Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) is unnecessary and should be deleted. Phew! PatGallacher 10:31, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) is unnecessary and should be deleted. Arrigo 23:34, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]