Talk:Statue

I think with a 90% chance if somebody is talking about a "statue" in GW he is talking about a god's statue. I'm creating a redicrect. --Tetris L 20:08, 4 Oct 2005 (EST)

Roland, if someone is linking to or searching for "Statue" they are better served landing in the general God's statue article. --Karlos 14:03, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm guessing that he was acting on the split tag that is discussed at Talk:God%27s_statue, as he's also updated Statue of Dwayna. I agree with you that the "Statue" title is too vague to be used in that split; but I think that this article could be setup as a general disambiguation article similar to how Roland had set it up (maybe also including links to other statues, such as the one of Droknar, etc).  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:28, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
 * Edit - however, I see that Roland has now migrated over more of the info from God's statue - I disagree with that move, as this article's title is too vague to be specific to the God's statues. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:30, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
 * Uhm if you don't like the split into statue/statue of .., then why does the split notice stand on god's statue unchallenged? You know, this tag together with the talk page thread could confuse hapless contributors like me into thinking that a split into statue/statue of... is desired, agreed upon, but was simply forgotten about or lost priority or whatever. RolandOfGilead 21:32, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
 * You posted a reply on the other talk page, so it's surprising that you would claim it went unchallenged - see Karlos' post on that thread where he specifically disagreed with the use of "Statue" (although not the other listings in the split proposal). No final agreement was reached, as it does appear that those involved at the time may have forgotten the conversation; but it was most certainly challenged. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:15, 11 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Roland asked me to delete this (so presumably he could move God's statue to this name, though I'm not sure why he wants deletion rather than just editing one or the other to make a redirect). I'm going to point him at this talk page.  --Fyren 21:51, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
 * Yeah I noticed the activity my edits caused shortly after I asked you to delete this (after AFAIK 2 solid months of silence on the matter, anyhow). As you see, in the posting above yours (ahem), I expressed my newly acquried confusion about what the fate of God's statue shall be. So, no deletion just yet I guess. Going to sleep now, it's late (or rather, very early) where I dwell. RolandOfGilead 22:06, 11 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Roland, you have removed the redirect without actually explaining why. The fact that God's statue should be split up is COMPLETELY different from the fact that you are renaming God's statue to "statue." Do you see the difference? Please do not change the article back until you explain how "statue" only refers to God's statue and not any other statue (like the big fat Droknar Statue in Droknar's Forge). --Karlos 23:35, 11 October 2006 (CDT)
 * I see what you're getting at, but as far as I understand it, a redirect is the statement that the source article can be conclusively integrated into the target article or that they would be equivalent in content. So if anything, then the redirect states that Statue and God's statue are at least equivalent (or Statue even containing less info than God's statue), which is obviously not true. My plan, therefore, was to make Statue a disambig page with the content of God's statue being the default content since it's the most relevant article, as we agree. I think a disambiguation or a link to a to-be-filled Category:Statues is more informative than a redirect and the very subtle implication that "if God's statue exist, there might be other statues as well who have other qualifiers."
 * However, I do agree that a disambiguation page could also be started from God's statue. Ultimately, it doesn't matter to me where a user starts from. What matters is that someone, anyone, actually starts working. RolandOfGilead


 * I don't think we should have an article for statue at all. It's like having an article for "Vial" or "Drop." In and of itself, too general and will just be a big speculative disambiguation page. Just name things with full proper names. I made statue a redirect to preserve existing links. --Karlos 02:36, 14 October 2006 (CDT)