Talk:Cleveland (disambiguation)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am pretty confused about what has happened to Cleveland, England, but I think that it is no longer a county. There is a Redcar & Cleveland local govt authority but not, as was suggested here and on the relevant page, an actual county of Cleveland. If I'm wrong please let me know! :) Nevilley 19:02 Dec 15, 2002 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] True or false??

True or false: many of these in the United States are honors of Grover Cleveland. This is helpful in determining Cleveland's honor rank. (See Talk:George Washington for what an honor rank is.) 66.245.64.54 15:51, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect?

Someone tried to redirect this page to Cleveland, Ohio. He also created a Cleveland (disambiguation) page. Perhaps THIS page Cleveland should be a direct to Cleveland (disambiguation) but it seems like it should definitely not go to Cleveland, Ohio automatically. See also here.

That redirect was the correct thing to do, IMO. I'm requesting a reinstatement the move and redirect. - EurekaLott 01:18, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
That redirect was a bad mistake and must not be repeated, IMO. Having "Cleveland" is the disamb page is great, having it go to Ohio would be stupid. Don't do it please. 138.37.188.109 18:27, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleveland → Cleveland (disambiguation)

The Cleveland article would then become a redirect to Cleveland, Ohio. This move was made and than undone, but it seems like a good idea. See discussion at Wikipedia talk:How to rename (move) a page#Redirect policy? - EurekaLott 01:34, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Oppose for the same reasons I opposed Jooler's attempt at making Middlesex about his preferred Middlesex in England and moving the unconfusing disambiguation currently at Middlesex off somewhere else. There are just too many Clevelands, and Ohio's city (while most well known for me) is not the only one. This disambiguation works, albeit taking only mere seconds to navigate for someone seeking the Ohio metropolis. However, it is when we are exposed to more information than we were searching for leading us down paths we never intended to traverse that we learn stuff. —ExplorerCDT 16:25, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Support I can't speak for American usage, but to be honest, if somebody says 'Cleveland' to me, I'll think of the American city, not the British usage. (Granted I live in the south of England though). --Neo 16:20, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't know about you, but I would rather not think of the American city if you know what I mean. —ExplorerCDT 16:46, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Cleveland, Ohio should not be moved. The current name conforms to naming conventions. For reference, Minneapolis redirects to Minneapolis, Minnesota, Atlanta redirects to Atlanta, Georgia, Miami redirects to Miami, Florida, Detroit redirects to Detroit, Michigan, Philadelphia redirects to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and so on. - EurekaLott 18:46, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Looking at the many links to the current disambiguation page Cleveland, it is clear to me that nearly all of them are meant to link to Cleveland, Ohio, so it makes sense that Cleveland would be a redirect there (with a link to Cleveland (disamiguation) at the top of Cleveland, Ohio, of course). This seems standard practice to me, when one use of a name is far more common than the others. -R. fiend 19:24, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support moving the disamb page back to Cleveland (disambiguation) and making Cleveland redir to Cleveland, Ohio (which already links to Cleveland (disambiguation)), as there seems to be no other significant current usage for the name--a scan of Cleveland's 'what links here' shows the vast majority are looking for the Ohio city. This would also match Miami, Vancouver, and a host of other cities. I am unaware of any precedent for choosing article titles explicitly to expose readers to other uses. Niteowlneils 19:28, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. →Raul654 19:55, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong support. There is no excuse for thrusting a disambiguation page at the reader who just wants to read about Cleveland. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:52, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. It's by far the best known Cleveland. Not unlike the situation with Boston (disambiguation) and Boston. Cleveland should get us to page for the Ohio city, whether it's titled "Cleveland" or "Cleveland, Ohio". -- Curps 23:55, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Philip Baird Shearer 00:02, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Whether or not to redirect articles for major cities is a question still under debate—currently, cities outside the U.S. (Kyoto, Calcutta, Yangôn) are rightfully hosted under their name alone, where the topic is clearly the primary one, but American cities like Chicago, Illinois and Dallas, Texas don't enjoy the same status—this month. They're moved back and forth on a regular basis, but at the moment redirects are the vogue. ADH (t&m) 04:02, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support -- ALoan (Talk) 12:58, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • 'Support - The county of Cleveland in England had only a short history. The majority of links for Cleveland will be about the city in Ohio. Jooler 15:06, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. / Tupsharru 22:51, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Neutralitytalk 06:37, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. I would support having the article on the city at Cleveland as well, but only as part of a general settlement of American city-naming issues, where other cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, and so forth are also moved to the article without the state name. There was a lengthy discussion of this at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (cities and towns), in which there appeared to be an incipient consensus towards this conclusion, but nothing was ever implemented. At any rate, Cleveland should certainly redirect to the Ohio city. john k 02:10, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It is fine how it is right now, thank you very much, with Cleveland as the disambiguation page. There is no way that Cleveland should take you straight off to Ohio - it's monstrous. The English Cleveland is an important historical usage and should not be made into a backwater. People being too lazy to reference things properly (Cleveland, Ohio; Cleveland, England) is a separate problem and should not be dealt with by just going with the US consensus. If you make this change you are once again saying that only the US's Weltanschauung is important here - is that the message you want to give? Oh and the argument above about Cleveland being only briefly a county is disingenuous at best - you don't need to try very hard to understand that its lengthy role as a historic area name predates its brief period as a county and ex-county by - ooh, what, a millennium or so? Really, this is a very sad debate. If you do stuff like this then perhaps you should be honest and make it clear that the intention is to make this into us.wikipedia.org, the wikipedia that believes in US domination of the world. Mmm. nice. 138.37.188.109 18:40, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Carrp 19:42, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Engish wording

Sorry but this link wording: "Cleveland, a former county in England (1974–96) now known as Tees Valley" is VERY difficult to love. In a historical view, the English Cleveland was a county for a few minutes and has been an ex-county for a few minutes more. It was the historic name of an area for really quite a bit longer than that. Furthermore it maps BADLY onto Tees Valley. I've replaced that wording with something that makes sense. 138.37.188.109 18:27, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Another redirect arguement

In my opinion, Cleveland should redirect to this disambig. Cleveland, England's borough's in total have a population over 500,000. Also, the fact you have have Grover Cleveland, which is surely another notable Cleveland? Computerjoe's talk 19:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/l/e/Talk%7ECleveland_%28disambiguation%29_7049.html"