Talk:Vista

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no consensus for move. Joelito (talk) 22:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Vista → Vista (disambiguation) – Rationale: almost all people arriving at the Vista page will be looking for Windows Vista the major upcoming Windows operating system. It has been proposed that there be a redirect, and at the top of the Windows Vista article there be an {{otheruses}} tag —- Jack (talk) 12:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Oppose. Vista is a very common term that is well established. Just because there is a new use, is not justification to make a change like this. Even if the majority of the hits are for the OS, there is still the issue of not directing people to the wrong place. This is likely to happen a large number of times. Don't lose sight of the number of entries in the dab list already. Vegaswikian 23:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. The page should be reorganized for navigation, but there is no need to move a product with a perfectly disambigged name to clobber an inaccurate shorthand. Compare NT, XP. --Dhartung | Talk 07:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Common term that should not be assumed to exclusively reference the OS. -- Bovineone 14:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Very few people will type Vista and expect to get taken directly to the Windows Vista page. They should be more than happy to click on the first link. Many other entries are referred to as just Vista (the place names, for example). --Usgnus 15:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I searched Vista expecting Windows Vista. If the vast majority of users typing Vista expect to be shown Windows Vista, as I suspect will be the case, there is precedent for having the small minority have to go to a disambiguation page rather than have the majority go through that hassle.--Thud495 19:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. the current format is the same as XP and Windows XP. Crumbsucker 04:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Vista has too many more significant and long standing meanings besides Windows. Dbchip 16:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. People who use Wikipedia should understand its nature. Disambiguation pages are very common for terms with more than one possible meaning/reference, and Vista is no exception. -- Horncomposer 08:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I had never heard any of those other uses for the term Vista before heading to this article. I came to this article just because of Microsoft's operating system. 128.187.80.2 19:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Yes, these other uses should be represented, but in a seperate disambiguation page. 99% of people will be looking for the OS - Jack (talk) 01:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. While I do agree many will search Vista expecting the OS, it does have other uses of the name and the official name is Windows Vista not Vista. Zujik 15:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. rationale is false premise. Those who want MS Vista might just as easily go to Microsoft rather than wikipedia GraemeLeggett 11:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

• How can someone know, much less prove, that 99% of the searches will be for a particlar use? Vegaswikian 18:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Whenever Microsoft published official promotions of the OS, it must legally use "Windows Vista" and not simply "Vista", due to the trademark being granted to the full name (it would not have been able to get a trademark on just "Vista"; same for "Microsoft Office" vs "Office", or "Microsoft [Office] Word" vs "Word"). This other article [1] describes some of the other legal implications of the Vista naming conflict. Wikipedia should try to not intentionally further complicate and perpetuate the misuse of non-official abbreviated names. -- Bovineone 02:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS to move page, per discussion below. -GTBacchus^(talk) 22:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Vista → Vista (disambiguation) — Most people will be looking for Windows Vista when searching for Vista. I propose to change this page to a disambig page and have Vista redirect to Windows Vista. W3stfa11/^{Talk to me} 03:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

[edit] Survey - in support of the move

1. Support. W3stfa11/^{Talk to me} 03:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
2. Support Wikipedia often redirects articles to the most common object to bare that name, even if a more correct name exists, or if there is more then one object baring that name. Vista should redirct to Windows Vista because it is currently the most popular object to bare that name.--Honeymane_{Heghlu meH QaQ jajvam} 03:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
3. Support Same reasons as Honeymane. "Vista" is not a common word, and will primarily used for Windows Vista now that it has been released. Cloud02 21:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
4. Support While some good arguments have been made in opposition of the move I don't believe they really make sense in the face of how significant Windows Vista is when compared to other uses of the word. Those more minor uses should of course still be easily accessible so I think it'd be best if Vista redirected to Windows Vista and then had a disambig link at the top. sean 07:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - in opposition to the move

1. Oppose for the same reasons the move was rejected before. Vista is a very common term that can refer to many things, not to mention that the OS is always called Windows Vista and that would be the most likely search. TJ Spyke 03:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
2. Oppose for the same reasons. In addition, encouraging further acceptance of an incomplete version of the trademarked name leads to further confusion. -- Bovineone 04:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose - Windows Vista is already right at the top of the list. Couldn't miss it for toffee. Chris cheese whine 05:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
4. Oppose for the same reasons the move was initially rejected. Vista has many meanings. People wanting Windows Vista should look under Windows Vista. This page already does an excellent job disambiguating the various usages. Bendono 11:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
5. Oppose Bendono hit it on the head. Most people are going to be searching for Windows Vista so there is no reason to displace the disambiguation page. It serves its purpose. 205.157.110.11 15:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose - no evidence that this is the overwhelming use except amongst geeks. Better to stay as it is. -- Beardo 16:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
7. Oppose. There is no reason why the logic explained in the first survey has changed. There is simply no justification to redirect large numbers of readers to the wrong article. Vista is too common of a word. Also consider that this is a fad usage and when Windows Vista is replaced its usage will drop very quickly. ME anyone? If anyone decides to vote in support of this change do so only after viewing this page which is the Microsoft page for the product know as Windows Vista. Vegaswikian 21:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
8. Oppose. Windows Vista isn't even close to being the preeminent use of the term.--Bobblehead 21:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
9. Oppose. As noted, Windows Vista will eventually be replaced (if Wikipedia had been around, say, five years ago, similar arguments might have been advanced to redirect Vista to Toyota Vista), but many of the other terms will still be around. The full name of the OS is almost universally known to anyone who would be searching for information about it. Most people should be smart enough to realize that "vista" has so many uses, that they ought to enter a fuller term like "Windows Vista" (or maybe "Microsoft Vista") to get to that specific article. And if they are unaware that the word has so many other uses, perhaps it would actually help them become better informed to first take them to a page where they can see how many other contexts in which the term is used. --Groggy Dice T | C 03:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
10. Oppose. Linking or searching should be to "Windows Vista". GraemeLeggett 09:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
11. Oppose per above. PC78 14:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
12. Oppose. What is Window's Vista? —  AjaxSmack  02:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
13. Oppose. Per AjaxSmack. --Serge 08:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
14. Oppose per Beardo. Geeks! Recury 16:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:

• What a reader expected to see when they used a word is not a reason to change a disambiguation to a redirect. Disambiguation pages are there to explain to readers that in many cases a word or phrase has many uses. While Wikipedia many have articles on many of the them, the user still needs to decide which one they are interested in. Everyone's interests and focus is different. Vegaswikian 21:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
• Since when is Vista a common word? there are a handfull of towns that has the name, and some other stuff. I fail to see how that makes a word common Cloud02 21:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Being a common word is not at issue. Being the primary use of the word is. The current dab guidelines say if there is any significant discussion, then the dab belongs at the main name space. Vegaswikian 06:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.