Talk:Sierra Leone Krio people
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Move
Unless there's a distinct non-Sierra Leone Krio people, I strongly suggest we move this to Krio people. NickelShoe 04:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know whether there is another group called just "Krio". However, there are many groups all over the world who are called by similar names - Creol, Kriol, Kreyol, Kriolu, etc.. -- all variants of "Creole", like (presumably) "Krio". The "see also" list at Krio should give you an idea.
- I suppose that those readers who are already familiar with the Krio will not mistake it with the Kriol or the Kreyol or whatever, so the longer name for them is just a nuisance. However, the title of a Wikipedia article should be chosen for the benefit of the general reader, not for the convenience of those who are familiar with the topic. Believe me, when I started cleaning up these articles, I had a very hard time telling one language from the other; especially since some such groups had no articles (and some still don't), others were listed with improper names, etc.
- This naming scheme — "PLACE NAME people" — was the simplest and most natural uniform solution that I could think of. It also tells readers (e.g. in search result pages) where the people is from Africa or America, without the reader having to open the article to find out.
- If you are not convinced, at least please wait for a few months until the dust settles and we can be sure that there are no other Krios in Mongolia or Transcaucasian Patagonia.
- Would it be enough to just have Krio people redirect to this article until then?
- Thanks, and all the best, Jorge Stolfi 05:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- PS. I also learned that there is an "Iberian" kingdom in the Caucasus, and there were Veneti in Italy, France, and the Baltic, all unrelated. Apparently much editing has been wasted by people who were misled by the similarity of names. Jorge Stolfi 05:57, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't believe a general reader will ever type in "Sierra Leone Krio people". When two people have similar names, we don't, for instance, call one Catherine Elliott (singer) and one Kathryn Eliot (archaeologist). Because their names are already different. We do, however, put a leading line to the effect of
- This article is about Catherine Elliott, the singer. For the similarly named archaeologist, see Kathryn Eliot.
I think that would be the appropriate approach here. Additional words in the title only it harder to find for people less familiar with the subject matter. NickelShoe 15:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Because a reader would have to guess as to your naming scheme and already believe that there's multiple Krio peoples. A casual reader just wants to know about Krios and types as such. If there's more than one with the same name, we need a dab page. If they're only similar, then we need the leading lines to help people get where they're going. NickelShoe 15:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- Of course a random user will not type Sierra Leone Krio people. He will type "Krio" and get to the disamb page (which would have to be the case anyway, right?). That page offers him the choice between Sierra Leone Krio language and Sierra Leone Krio people (and Cape Krio too; but, granted, that is a very obscure sense which doesn't even have an article yet).
- Or, if he is a bit more Wikipedia-wise, he will type "Krio people" or "Krio language", and (assuming that there are no other Krio peoples/languages out there somewhere) will go directly to the correct page.
- Would that be OK, at least for the time being?
- All the best, Jorge Stolfi 15:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
For the time being, of course that's fine (wrong, I believe, but acceptable). But if no other Krios pop up, I still believe this should be moved. NickelShoe 15:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
- I just found a tribe in Indonesia called the Krio Dayak, after the Krio River. OK, they doesn't seem to be as important as the Sierra Leone Krios; and that may be just a variant spelling (one page seems to say that it is also called Keriu language). So it may be argued whether it counts or not. Anyway... Jorge Stolfi 19:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm convinced that if two subjects have different names, even if only minimally different, that's sufficient for the differences in their titles. Additional disambiguation goes in the cute little top sentence or a disambiguation page. That's what they're for. Titles should only contain disambiguation if absolutely necessary, and here it's not. NickelShoe 04:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)