Talk:Hun-Grrr (SG)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Deleting/Moving
[edit]Considering this is a canon spelling for the G1 character, I think it's a bad idea to move the SG article here. Clarity trumps very technical accuracy, IMHO. --Jeysie 06:59, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- I agree. - Starfield 09:04, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- I concur as well. Geewunling 09:08, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- What "clarity" are you invoking here? How is redirecting this to Hun-Gurrr more "clear" than having the SG guy here? Why can't the disambig template do the job it's made for? —Interrobang 16:07, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- If SG Hun-Grrr is here it implies there aren't any other Hun-Grrrs. But there is. There is a G1 Hun-Grrr whose name has an alternate spelling of "Hun-Gurrr". - Starfield 16:12, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- That's what the disambig template is for. "Hey, there's another dude with the same name! Go here if you want him." —Interrobang 16:41, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- The G1 character is officially Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr or Hun-Grr depending on the source medium. Therefore, all three namespaces are already occupied. Any new character using any of those spellings would automatically need a disambig (in this case Hun-Grrr (SG)). The G1 character would then occupy namespaces Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr (G1) and Hun-Grr. At least that's what I think Jeysie means. Khajidha 16:49, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- Yes, you got it in one, Khajidha. And as per our usual standards, that means the plain "Hun-Grrr" thus redirects to the more prominent character--in this case the much more well-known G1 version vs. the SG version that only shows up in a TFCC bio. --Jeysie 16:56, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- Just for clarity's sake: if a third Hun-Grrr shows up, that would lead to a full disambig page, right? Khajidha 19:32, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- Yes, you got it in one, Khajidha. And as per our usual standards, that means the plain "Hun-Grrr" thus redirects to the more prominent character--in this case the much more well-known G1 version vs. the SG version that only shows up in a TFCC bio. --Jeysie 16:56, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- The G1 character is officially Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr or Hun-Grr depending on the source medium. Therefore, all three namespaces are already occupied. Any new character using any of those spellings would automatically need a disambig (in this case Hun-Grrr (SG)). The G1 character would then occupy namespaces Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr (G1) and Hun-Grr. At least that's what I think Jeysie means. Khajidha 16:49, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- That's what the disambig template is for. "Hey, there's another dude with the same name! Go here if you want him." —Interrobang 16:41, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- If SG Hun-Grrr is here it implies there aren't any other Hun-Grrrs. But there is. There is a G1 Hun-Grrr whose name has an alternate spelling of "Hun-Gurrr". - Starfield 16:12, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- What "clarity" are you invoking here? How is redirecting this to Hun-Gurrr more "clear" than having the SG guy here? Why can't the disambig template do the job it's made for? —Interrobang 16:07, 12 November 2009 (EST)
Shouldn't this be at Hun-Grrr (SG), given that Hun-Grrr is an official spelling of G1 Hun-Gurrr's name? It seems to be discussed above, but if there's a conclusion there I don't see it. -- Riptide (talk) 16:59, 16 April 2015 (EDT)
- The reasoning is that Hun-Grrr only needs a disambiguation if there is another article named "Hun-Grrr". Since there aren't any other articles (not characters) named "Hun-Grrr", this article doesn't need the disambiguation in its title. If people end up at this article when they're looking for the G1 guy, there's a link right at the top of the page anyway. --abates (talk) 17:14, 16 April 2015 (EDT)