Talk:Robert Goddard (disambiguation)

I think that we should move the Robert Goddard (scientist) page here, to "Robert Goddard" with just a link to the page on Robert Goddard (novelist) on it. I think this will make things easier for people for the following reasons:

the rocket scientist is far, far better known than the novelist, as a google search clearly demonstrates;
the page on the scientist has been edited 15 times (four times by myself) while the page on the novelist has only been edited twice (once just to put a stub tag on it);
the page on the scientist is linked to from 39 other pages while the page on the novelist is linked to from only two pages, Robert Goddard and List of people by name: Go-Gq; and
the "Robert Goddard" page is dedicated to the rocket scientist in both the French and German editions of Wikipedia.

Does anyone else think this would be a good idea?

Jacob1207 18:48, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I can quite see your point. However, my preference is always for a disambiguation page with links to individual articles, rather than the other way round. I think it's because I feel it is assuming too much to say that one of those named is "more famous" than any other, except in very few cases. If you were to look at the UK version of Google, you would find that most of the references are to the author. No doubt, because the rocket scientist is American, he is better known in the USA, but it doesn't necessarily follow that he is better known worldwide. I freely admit I'd never heard of him until I saw your wikipedia article. So I think it would be good to have a little debate before coming to the decision. Deb 19:07, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. When I go to Google UK I find "Robert Goddard space" 124,000 links but "Robert Goddard novel" 20,000 links. Rmhermen 19:44, Apr 4, 2004 (UTC)

I'd call that another assumption. And you know what they say about assumptions. Deb 20:09, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

If you mean the assumption that Googling is a test of fame, you are correct and that is constantly discussed in the "Google test" procedure. But my point is that your assertion regarding the novelist and UK Google was demonstrably incorrect. I have no objection to a disambiguation page though as 20,000 or so hits is a pretty good indication of some fame. Rmhermen 16:17, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)

Hello, I was just passing by and thought I'd ~~stick my nose in~~ give my two cents as a relatively disinterested observer (I've never heard of either Goddard). I agree with Deb on this. Graham Greene (writer) is undeniably and vastly more famous than his namesake, the American Indian actor, yet Graham Greene points to a disambig page. I think that's reasonable, because (1) even if only 10% of people who type in the name are looking for the actor, let's accomodate them as much as the others, and (2) part of the pleasures of leafing (or clicking) thru an ecyclopedia is finding new and interesting things. I think it's interesting to find that there are 2 famous Robert Goddards. (I think Iron Man should be a disambig as well, as long as I'm on the topic.) I'd say keep the disambig page. Ensiform 21:50, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

What's happened on this ? There surely needs to be a link from "Robert Goddard" so that the novelist can be accessed - which is not the case now - his page can only be accessed if you know to add the word (novelist). I'm new to this so someone else needs to sort it out. Ghmyrtle 09:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]