Talk:Burchett

from VfD:

• Delete - This anon users name must be Burchett since every article he creates (many) are related to the last name "Burchett". He is creating this disambig page for every Burchett he can think of (maybe to include his own name and get it lost in the articles) and creating odd links back to the disambig page from within Burchett articles by linking from the last name even though it is being used to talk about the very article it is already in. - Tεxτurε 18:04, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Keep reasonable disambig page. If the user is vandalising other articles to link to it, fix that, and if he persists list on vandalism in progress remove all links to special:whatlinkshere/Burchett and make it an orphan only accessed by typing it in the go box. Dunc_Harris|☺ 18:44, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: I really think this is a family name tribute rather than a disambiguation. How many of the Burchetts listed are going to be searched for by their last name only? How many are known as Burchett? After all, the reason for a dab page is not to be a taxonomy, but to take multiple items with the same encyclopedia space and differentiate them -- thus Gone with the Wind (film) and Gone with the Wind. Geogre 19:01, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Comment- either of the two politicians might be searched under only their last name, since they will often appear that way in titles of legislation or documents. -FZ 19:36, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. We don't want or need pages for every last name (or every first name). A simple search on Burchett (or any last name) within Wikipedia already works well enough and is more trustworthy than attempting to maintain pages for every single last name. Jallan 15:35, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Keep as a valid disambig page. Although I'm normally eager to get rid of these vanity surname pages, this page is different in that it links to several articles with the last name. RickK 18:27, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment. And how many surnames are there for which such pages can be created? And first names? Why Burchett, and not Kenyes, Holmes, Singh, MacDonald, Fong, Jones, Koch, Michaels, Chevalier, Van Dusen, Huxley, Jackson, Lewis, Johnson, Smith, da Silva, Chrétien, Bush, ... perhaps more surnames than Wikipedia currently has articles? Jallan 19:56, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Actually, Keynes, Holmes, Singh, MacDonald, Jones, Koch, Huxley, Jackson, Lewis, Johnson, Smith, Chrétien, Bush do all exist either as entries for a place, group, or object of that name; disambiguation pages; or as redirects for people who are routinely referred to by only one name in many sources (many news articles will simply refer to "Chrétien" or "Bush" and assume you know who is meant, but someone reading from outside the home area of that publication, or in a later time, will not neccessarily know & will want to look it up). The disambiguation pages are made when there are more than one person who may routinely be referred to this way- Huxley is an excellent example, as both Aldous and T.H. Huxley, or their books, are frequently referred to by only their last name in their particular context. For cases like this, a disambig seems reasonable, and it looks like Burchett could reasonably be such a case, since there are two prominent political figures by that name who would have been referred to as such in news articles or legal act titles of their times. It seems worth keeping for this.-FZ 14:19, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion