Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1251315-20150307101537/@comment-1251315-20150307194844

Ned1230 wrote: 2-page disambigs are kind of useless and can occasionally lead to that stray IP making a page out of it. So, we can just redirect it to the more popular article and add a For template for the other one (if there isn't one already). I don't think 2-link disambiguations should be removed and then changed to a redirect. If a 2-link disambiguation is removed, it should be replaced with something. We do this with characters, quests, items, food etc, so why don't we do the same with locations? We cannot predict when a later game will have a location with the same name: if a new TES game comes out and has a location with such a name, we can fix it when it happens, not assume there will be and leave things as they are o.O

We can keep 3-or-more ones; they are actually useful to people. Anybody who reads Wikipedia knows what disambigs are. That's nearly everybody. 3+ link disambigs will always be kept. There is no doubt in removing them. However, we could use a different method of having "disambiguations". They are already categorised under the Disambiguation category and they can also be found under Special:Disambiguations. In my mind, a disambiguation should not be in people's faces (eg searching Staff of Magnus should not give the user a list of links, but could be replaced with a lore page, with the links to different games in the article itself).

This theory holds true for things like Solstheim (which, for all intents and purposes, is a 2-link disambiguation), which are needless and pointless.