Talk:What happened to the Sirocco disambig?

I would have sworn that I created a disambig page so that a search for Sirocco doesn't automatically send you to Sirocco (effect). But it's gone. Either I screwed something up or it was deleted, and I'd like to know which, and why if it was deleted by someone else. Since there is an item called Sirocco the disambig seems to be appropriate. &rArr; Niminae (Contribs • Message • Email ) 07:45, June 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * Probably this: https://ddowiki.com/history/Sirocco. -- &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 08:58, June 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * That's correct . Basically, like is mentioned in the, there is no reason to have a disambig there because our namespacing takes care of it automatically. &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 09:17, June 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * I'm not sure I understand whatever is intended by "our namespacing takes care of it automatically." What is clear is that when you place 'Sirocco' in the search bar you are automatically routed to the 'Sirocco (effect)' page.  Thus if you were looking for the Sirocco item you are in fact misdirected and have to use the effect page link to get to where you wanted to go.  This seems like a perfect place for a disambiguation, because it is indeed ambiguous.  -- &rArr; Niminae (Contribs • Message • Email ) 09:49, June 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * If you type in "Sirocco" then you get the effect, if you type "Item:Sirocco" then you get the item. The item is linked from the effect page and the effect is linked from the item page. This is one of the big reasons why we have an Item: namespace in the first place, so we don't need multiple DAB pages to add an extra click/page load for "Sirocco (effect)" and "Sirocco (item)".  It's simply "Item:Sirocco" if you want the item and "Sirocco" if you want the effect.  &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 21:19, June 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * You have summed up the entire reason for a disambiguation page to exist, since there is both an item and an item effect which use the same name. I think you'll find that most people will just type in the search term they are looking for.  That is the intuitive way to search for something, after all.  Only someone familiar with the idiosyncrasies of the wiki, and the idiocies of some of the wiki policies, would either know about using the 'Item:' prefix or would bother to use it as a part of their search term.  The goal should be to make the wiki work well for the most people, not to make less work for the editors.  The disambiguation page was created with that goal in mind.  -- &rArr; Niminae (Contribs • Message • Email ) 22:29, June 4, 2018 (EDT)
 * The typical user is not going to know how to differentiate. While it may be nice to have an internal item namespace for power users, the vast majority of people will rely on the disambiguation to find the correct page. I completely agree with . ( &rArr; Abolisher (Contribs • Message • Email ) 02:11, June 5, 2018 (EDT))


 * I agree that regular user does not know about namespaces. Anyway, when a user searches for Sirocco item by typing in Sirocco in the Search box, the amount of clicks to reach the item page stays the same. If they land on a disambig, they have to click the item. If they land on the effect, they have to click the item. No extra clicks needed. -- &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 02:51, June 5, 2018 (EDT)
 * The number of clicks is not and should not be the sole measure of being user friendly. The fact is that a person looking for the item Sirocco has to take pause, read the Sirocco item effect page, and only then see and click upon the Sirocco (item) link in order to get to where they wanted to go in the first place.  The disambiguation page which was deleted made the user aware that the term had different uses and asked them in a concise manner which use they were hunting for.  This seems to be the exact use for which a disambiguation page was envisioned, and yet for some silly reason that use is deemed in this case to be invalid.  -- &rArr; Niminae (Contribs • Message • Email ) 14:18, June 5, 2018 (EDT)
 * I gotta agree w/ Nim' - a universally useful Wiki must be intuitive, and cater to the lowest expectations, be that a non-native speaker or whatever. However, remember that a (less) commonly used term can be disambig'd at the top of the main article page(s) - we have several such (e.g. see Ruby), and those work just fine as is, no need for a separate, specific disambig page (which, imo, would be both clumsier and often slower). Unlike the WWW Wikipedia, we can show blatant favoritism for a more common usage over a less common one. With that in mind, I suggest we simply add a disambig comment w/ link at the top of either/both the Item:Sirocco and/or Sirocco (effect) page. &rArr; C-Hound (Contribs • Message • Email ) 16:19, June 5, 2018 (EDT)