Talk:New Hampshire (Frost)

Not Merging

This was (and still is) the main page to which Wikipedia readership is directed for the book. If it is important to disambiguate the book from the main poem in the book, which is also the title of the book, then there should be a disambiguation page for those items. If it's not worth disambiguating the poem from the book the poem is in, then the move should not have happened in the first place. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

"We should not disambiguate different works with the same title, even though this is established practice on enWS, because one other website that is easily editable by anyone happens to use an ambiguous title when linking to our website" -EP —Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:04, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

It was you who moved this work with the stated aim of using the location for disambiguation. If you did not intend to use the page for disambiguation, then you misrepresented your reason for the move. If using the page for disambiguation was not your reason for moving the entire work to a new location, then the move was made in error, and the work should be moved back where it was. We should not be moving works solely for the purpose of redirecting to a new location. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

That's nonsense and you know it. We do not do multi-layer disambiguation of disambiguation pages on this site. New Hampshire (Frost) is an ambiguous title, and should redirect to New Hampshire where all works by this title are listed, just like we always do. We don't let Wikipedia's "external links" dicatate how we do things here, as you well know. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:19, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

And there's no point in pretending that incoming links to this work are such a big deal, considering that most of the incoming links redirect to Miscellaneous Poems to 1920 instead because no one ever bothered to properly sort out the top-level pages. So if you really think that this 1923 Pulitzer-Prize winning collection should be at least as prominent as a 1999 web-original edition, you can stop pretending that my fixes are problematic. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 16:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

So you moved the page under false pretenses, as you did not move it in order to use the page to "Disambiguate". You personally felt the title was ambiguous somehow, even though both items to which the page title referred were at that page. You made a needless move, and should move the work back to its previous location. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:55, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

To summarize for others:

(1) [1] Beleg Tâl moved New Hampshire (Frost) to New Hampshire (1923) with the stated purpose of using the original page for disambiguaiton

(2) [2] Beleg Tâl then moved New Hampshire (1923) to New Hampshire, a Poem with Notes and Grace Notes without leaving a redirect but making the same claim of needing the new page for disambiguation

(3) [3] Beleg Tâl then changed the redirect on New Hampshire (Frost) to point to the disambiguation page New Hampshire which is less specific

(4) [4] EncycloPetey then changed the redirect to point to New Hampshire, a Poem with Notes and Grace Notes, which is the work by Frost that was originally here

(5) [5] Beleg Tâl then converted the redirect to a disambiguation page for the book by Frost and the poem by Frost that is in the book.

(6) [6] Beleg Tâl then posted a Merge notice; though I do not know why the edit histories need to be merged

(7) We have had the above conversation, during which Beleg Tâl has indicated that there was never any intention of using the page for disambiguation; it was always going to be a redirect, and offers a quote from me about why this page should not be a disambiguation page, despite the fact that it was Beleg Tâl who turned this into a disambiguation page.

I am left wondering why any move of this high-profile work was necessary, since it both is the book by Frost, and the title poem is also in the book. If no new disambiguation was needed, there why was the entire work moved, disrupting all the links? --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

To summarize:

1. I saw that the page New Hampshire (Frost) redirected to the 1923 edition of a collection of poems by Frost (currently located here), ignoring the fact that there is another page on enWS containing a work by Frost called New Hampshire (currently loated here). I also noticed that none of the works published in this collection were properly linked (via versions pages, disambig pages, redirect, or otherwise), and that significant cleanup was needed.
2. As part of my work on fixing these pages, I performed the ordinary standard practice of redirecting the ambiguous title New Hampshire (Frost) to the disambiguation page New Hampshire, and moved the 1923 collection to an unambiguous page title (originally choosing New Hampshire (1923) but then realizing that New Hampshire, a Poem with Notes and Grace Notes was more appropriate)
3. EP decided to revert these fixes because of some external links from Wikipedia (even though those links could have been updated, and have since been updated)
4. I decided that, instead of engaging in an edit war, it would be better to at least make the ambiguous link New Hampshire (Frost) into a disambiguation page, than to have it misleadingly redirect to only one of the two pages containing works by this title. I also flagged it with {{merge}} because redirecting to New Hampshire is our usual standard practice (with New Hampshire (Frost) being the single anomaly on enWS at this time)

@EncycloPetey you are continuing to create a false dichotomy between "no disambiguation is needed" and "this page should be a disambiguation page". As I have said many times in this discussion alone, this is our standard practice that we have always done. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

1. The "other work" is the title work of the first work and is part of it. Both works were housed at the same location, and still are, but in a new location. "significant cleanup was needed" is not a reason to move a page under the false pretences of disambiguation.

2. This is evidence that you had not thought through the move before starting it. It is not justification for the original move.

3. Where did I revert any fixes? What you are stating here is a flat lie. I created a redirect for the work. If I reverted any fixes involved in this mess, please provide the diffs or apologize for lying.

4. The redirect I created pointed to both of the items in question, because both are the same work: one is the poem, the other is the book in which the poem is the title piece. Your creation of the disambiguation page was disingenuous if you did not intend to have it disambiguate anything. You have violated several standard practices in your process, and are now blaming me for it. We have never moved a work for disambiguation, only to instead redirect, as a standard practice, but you have done so. We have never created disambiguation pages for works by a specific author as standard practice, but you have done so. We have never accused other editors of reverting fixes, when the other person has made no such reversions, as standard practice, but you have done so. What exactly are you claiming is standard practice? Any why should the edit history of this page be merged with the other page? That was why you posted the merge discussion notice, and I have yet to hear a reason for merging the histories of the two pages. Why can't it simply be a redirect to the book and poem by Frost? Or why can't the work be moved back where it was to start with, since everything was fine before the move? If the disambiguation is happening at New Hampshire, and a link at the top of New Hampshire (Frost) directed the reader there for other works by that title, then there is no need to have moved the work in the first place. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Of course I'm blaming you. Here is the revert that you accused me of lying about.

And I'm not going to pretend that New Hampshire (Frost, "I met a lady from the South who said") is the same thing as New Hampshire, a Poem with Notes and Grace Notes, unlike all the other poems published in this collection, unlike any poem published in any collection for that matter. And if "everything was fine" before I started working on this, then I'll stop bothering with it, and leave all the redirects pointing to Miscellaneous Poems to 1920 instead, because yep, "everything is fine". —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

You said "EP decided to revert these fixes". I created a redirect form the original location to the new location, which I explicitly pointed out above. Do you believe that making a redirect constitutes "EP decided to revert these fixes"? I also did not recommend converting the page into a disambiguation page, nor suggested any move. That's entirely on you. Please do not blame me for actions that you took. And do not lie. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

"Do you believe that making a redirect constitutes "EP decided to revert these fixes"?" " - yes, of course I do, because that's what you did. Or is this screenshot also a lie? Hm?

—Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

"What exactly are you claiming is standard practice?'—I'll tell you what is standard practice: treating collections and the works published inside those collections as separate works is standard practice, and redirecting ambiguous titles like New Hampshire (Frost) to disambiguation pages like New Hampshire is standard practice, and you are the one who reverted one of those standard practices and justified it by trying to ignore the other. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

So "EP decided to revert these fixes" refers to a single edit changing a redirect target? Why then did you lie saying "EP decided to revert these fixes"? What fixes? Because "these fixes" is plural", and appears to indicate that I made reverts of all your changes. Are you really making all this fuss over a single redirect target change, so that the redirect with author name pointed to the work that was moved, instead of pointing to a disambiguation page? A change that restored an edit you had previously made [7]? --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

• Beleg Tâl, you have repeatedly undone my work along similar lines recently. I acquiesced in your actions then, as I assumed that you were speaking from a knowledge of consensus. However, this does not seem to be the case. As there is clearly no consensus position with respect to this, and I was the one doing that work, please revert your removals of those disambiguation pages (e.g., Flood (Itō)) posthaste. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 00:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

  @TE(æ)A,ea. I genuinely apologize for having undone your work in the past. It's a shitty and infuriating thing to do. And as for Flood (Itō) and the others: if you believe that EP's actions above are sufficient to invalidate years of common practice without further discussion at WS:S, feel free to restore them, and I promise I won't touch them. —Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

  @Beleg Tâl But I didn't turn this into a disambiguation page; you're the person who created this as a disambiguation page, contrary to what you told TE(æ)A,ea. So you've told one person one thing and then did the opposite. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:01, 29 September 2024 (UTC)