Talk:Erik Rhodes

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles

Disambiguation

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Untitled[edit]

Which Erik Rhodes is more notable depends on your POV. If you are into Movies from the 1930s, Erik Rhodes (actor) will be much more notable. If you are into gay porn, Erik Rhodes (porn star) is a major new actor with a contract from the largest studio in the business, and is very notable. As far as how many links the various articles have, of course the old one will get more, it's been around since October of last year. Given time, I think the porn star will have more links. The main page should be a disambiguation. The porn star is at least as notable as the actor. If you disagree, perhaps we should get some mediation. --Todd 07:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I've been using the signature button at the top, which puts in the ~~~~ for me. I'm not sure why it hasn't been working.—Preceding unsigned comment added by SneakyTodd (talk • contribs) 07:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do disagree, but if for now you will leave the redirect to the actor, the move request should bring out the administration input that you desire. Rather than have to change a whole list of links perhaps twice, if you will just give this a week and it will get sorted out. The links at the top of both pages should have anyone find either for now. Once there is consensus, if it would go as you expect, I'll change the links. All I can say is that some time back when I raised questions such as yours, the established name was always given precedence with the link to find others by that name from a link at the top of the page. Doc 07:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm confused as to why you'd have to edit the links twice. Any link you change to [[Erik Rhodes (actor)|Erik Rhodes]] shouldn't need to be changed back regardless of what happens. Perhaps it would be a good idea to change the links ahead of time, just in case. Looking throught the disambiguation list, there are plenty of cases where there are only 2 names, and even one where there is only one article written. I guess we will have to wait and see what the admins say --Todd 07:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Were I to change the links to Eric Rhodes (actor) if the outcome is to move that article back to Eric Rhodes, then all of the links would be incorrect and have to be changed again. That is why I want to wait for the outcome. Doc 07:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not if you leave the Erik Rhodes (actor) page where it is and redirect to it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by SneakyTodd (talk • contribs) 08:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the move takes place, the Erik Rhodes (actor) page will no longer exist. Then the links would need to be changed a second time. As I say, we should know something within the next week. Doc 08:37, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]