Talk:John Day
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Removals and reasons
[edit]Please add these back when articles are present or anticipated:
Red-links
[edit]- John Day (baseball manager) (1847–1926), American Major League Baseball manager
No-links
[edit]- John Day (fl. 1497), English merchant trading with Spain, who provided the most detailed account of John Cabot's voyage of 1497
- John Day (1738–1808), fellow of the Royal Society
- John Day (born 1955), member for Darling Range in the Western Australian Legislative Assembly
External-only links
[edit]John Day and John Daye
[edit]Should both spellings be listed on this page? Only one of the John Days (as of the day I post this) listed here has documented that they are also known as John Daye. I feel it would be more appropriate to list John Daye as a 'see also' in the same way that John Symth is listed as a 'see also' on the John Smith disamb page. -Gwguffey (talk) 03:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- The only arguments against that I can come up with are
- a) as one person has alternate spellings, it's difficult to divide the list cleanly, and
- b) unlike John Smith, there are only a few entries on this page so there's no real loss of clarity putting them all on one page.
- The problem is what happens to the page John Daye - I can't really see justification for making it a redirect to John Day (printer) on the grounds that he is aka Daye when there's a full-time John Daye in Johnny Daye, but then again, Johnny Daye is professionally known as Johnny rather than John. The only sensible solution I can see is to make John Daye point to a disambiguation page, and since
- a) there are only two of them, and
- b) one of them is also a John Day,
- it seems to me that John Daye needs to redirect to the disambiguation page John Day. I guess my instinct then is that we may as well list them all together, if only because one entry needs to go in both lists, but I won't insist on it if you'd rather make one or both of the Dayes a 'see also'.Quelcrime (talk) 12:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have no issue with your assertion that John Daye should not point at the printer, so it is now a disambig page. I think that sets things up better for when future john(ny) dayes have articles. The printer is listed on both pages as his article specifically mentions being known by both spellings. I'll defer to you, Quelcrime (or anyone else) about where/how Johnny Daye should be listed. -Gwguffey (talk) 14:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Upon revisiting this topic, its seems that merging them could make things simpler for readers looking for the articles being disambiguated. No issues with merging them. --Gwguffey (talk) 05:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)