Talk:Saint Petersburg (disambiguation)

Disambiguation

This is a foolish redirection. There's a place in the states called Amsterdam, but that would be just as foolish. --145.99.202.92 05:27, 27 March 2006 (EST)

I have to say I agree... (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:28, 27 March 2006 (EST)

I'll third the sentiment. If no one objects let's make this one another case of the "most famous" rule. -- (WT-en) Ryan 12:55, 27 March 2006 (EST)

I'll disagree. St. Petersburg, Florida is a big city and a big destination. It's not Paris (Arkansas). Searching for "St Petersburg" on Yahoo or Google gives the Florida city for all the first few results. St. Petersburg in Russia is simply not much, much more famous. --(WT-en) Evan 15:10, 27 March 2006 (EST)

I don't feel too strongly about this one, but it's worth noting that the St. Petersburg article on Wikipedia is about the Russian city, and from a traveler's standpoint I think that would definitely be the more famous destination. Agreed that the Florida city is a big place and that there are things for a tourist to do there, just not sure if anyone who hasn't been to Florida would ever have heard of it. But like I said, if anyone has a strong opinion that this should be disambiguated then this is enough of a corner case that I'd defer. -- (WT-en) Ryan 15:24, 27 March 2006 (EST)

@Evan; if you search on Санкт-Петербург in Google, it'll give you the russian cultural capital. I think its a bit ethnocentric to claim St. Petersburg (Florida) is as relevant. The most people who will roam Санкт-Петербург will do so in cyrillic. Also, quoting wikipedia on St. Petersburg, Florida, "it was named after Saint Petersburg, Russia, the birthplace of Peter Demens." But I don't know how to do redirects, so could someone please... --145.99.202.92 03:58, 7 April 2006 (EDT)

It is absolutely ethnocentric; this is the English-language Wikivoyage, which is written in English, and we need to be responsive to the needs of English speakers and readers. On the Russian Wikivoyage, I'd bet that Санкт-Петербург won't need a disambiguator. But that's not the subject under discussion.

Let's make sure that we're talking about the right thing here. We're not talking about whether the Russian city "deserves" the undecorated name, or is more important, or better, or more special or fantastic or precious. We're talking about whether a disambiguation string at the end of the article title is going to be a help or a hindrance. Since there is another notable city with the same name, it is a help, not a hindrance. --(WT-en) Evan 11:35, 11 April 2006 (EDT)

Just a note that we now have a "St. Petersburg (disambiguation)" page as the anonymous user above tried to "move" the article by creating a new disambiguation page and then copying the Russian article. If the Russian city is to be the "most famous" then the steps to take would be:

1. Delete the (copied) "St. Petersburg (disambiguation)" article.
2. Move "St. Petersburg" to "St. Petersbury (disambiguation)"
3. Delete "St. Petersburg" (which will be a redirect).
4. Move "St. Petersburg (Russia)" to "St. Petersburg".

This approach saves the history of all articles involved. Before doing this, however, we need a consensus that it's the right move. Evan, you indicated above that you're not OK with this. Any chance of a change of heart? -- (WT-en) Ryan 04:28, 7 April 2006 (EDT)

I have heard of the city in Florida, but would agree that for general travellers, the original one is much more famous than that one. As a minor point, I thought that in modern usage you ignored the fullstop (St rather than St.) -- (WT-en) DanielC 08:31, 11 April 2006 (EDT)

It depends on what kind of "general traveler". For a see-the-world traveler or typical European, ye olde Petrograd comes to mind, but for a sun-and-surf traveler or baseball fan in the U.S., the city on Tampa Bay would probably come first. Keep in mind that A) the City Formerly Known As Leningrad has only been "St. Petersburg" for 15 years (in most of our lifetimes), and B) we yanks are a self-absorbed lot who don't read the newspapers. :) - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 09:12, 11 April 2006 (EDT)

I'm concerned that people keep referring to the "most famous rule", which doesn't exist. With disambiguation, it's not a which-is-more-famous question, it's a which-is-so-much-more-famous-that-it's-not-even-an-issue question. We disambiguate by default, and only leave off the disambiguator when some city is sufficiently more famous than all others such that disambiguating is a hindrance rather than a help. If I had to put a rough number on it, I'd say a place needed an order of magnitude more famosity over all other places with the same name combined for it to be reasonable to drop the disambiguator, and maybe two.

So, no, I still don't think we should drop the disambiguator for the Russian city, per the current dab rules. If someone thinks that the Russian city is sufficiently more famous to justify dropping the disambiguator, I'd like to see some evidence. If the rules are wrong, let's change those. --(WT-en) Evan 11:35, 11 April 2006 (EDT)

Well, what now? Evan is the only one disagreeing. As the Project:Consensus states, I should just plunge forward, and if Evan really doenst agree, he can undo it? I can't move pages, though, or at least, don't know how to.

Regarding the much more famous, I agree, its a matter of opinion, but I'm very sorry that I cannot agree with claiming the surf resort in California ;) is somewhere near as famous as SPB. In the example in Project:Article_naming_conventions#Disambiguation, besides Paris, also Los Angeles is being used, which is also a mid sized (~100.000 [1]) town. Saint Pete has 248,232, SPB has 4,6 and LA 3,8 million. SPB is 19 times as large as St. Pete.

Also Wikipedia uses its St. Petersburg page for the Russian 'mega polis', and offers direct disambiguation to the States' fellow.

Regarding the Englishness, I've encountered such arguments also on Wikipedia. Do you agree with [2], or follows Wikivoyage another line? --145.99.202.92 04:37, 13 April 2006 (EDT)

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough: I disagree with you too. The city in the U.S. is famous among our audience as a travel destination. The question isn't "which has more people?" The question is whether one of them is so much, much more famous than the other that we can safely assume that almost anyone searching for just "St. Petersburg" on this site is interested in visiting Russia, not the Florida city on the gulf shore with a major league baseball stadium. You don't have to believe it, but it's true that Florida is a major destination and that in the minds of many English-speaking travelers, that's where "St. Petersburg" is found. This is not an encyclopedia; it's a travel guide. So, no: it doesn't have the same guidelines as Wikipedia. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 07:54, 13 April 2006 (EDT)

Wikipedia has had a long, long debate about this very same naming issue, and they came up with what, to me, looks like a pretty good compromise: "Saint Petersburg" is the Russian city, but the first-line disambig says "See also St. Petersburg, Florida or St. Petersburg (disambiguation)".

As an aside, I wouldn't object to a change in the rules. I think disambiguators are fundamentally evil and should be avoided unless necessary, whereas Evan's stance seems to be that they're the default state of affairs. I'll raise a separate discussion there. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:55, 13 April 2006 (EDT)

While organizing the Russia pages, I was about to just move St Petersburg where it belongs when I saw this. I have to say, having a disambiguation page come up for St Petersburg of all places (a tourist destination so rich I'd put it in the top 10 cities in the world with Paris, New York, etc.) is offensively ethnocentric. And I am as American as they come. Despite being from not so distant DC and having traveled to Florida on more than one occasion, the only context I have ever heard of St Petersburg, FL is when people are jokingly referring to the Florida locale rather than to St Petersburg. If St Petersburg were Miami, I would agree that a disambiguation page would be necessary, but in this case St Petersburg, Russia is much much much more famous than the minor Florida city and this should be represented in the page hierarchy. There should be a disambiguation note under the heading, but the current set up seems ridiculous. Evan, I think you are in the minority on this and are wrong. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald ^Talk 12:38, 7 April 2007 (EDT)

Yep, I just came here to see why there was a disamb for this page too... I definitely think the Russian city is much more famous than the FL town. According to our own articles:

The FL town is located at the base of the Tampa Bay peninsula in Pinellas County, Florida, and enjoys a more subdued social atmosphere than its larger cousin, Tampa.

The Russian city is Russia's cultural and former political capital is home to the Hermitage, arguably the world's best museum, and the city center is a living open air museum in its own right, making this city one of the world's top travel destinations

Any change of heart from Todd and Evan? – (WT-en) cacahuate ^talk 02:54, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

I'd like to apologize if my first note here seems too passionate—this sort of got under my skin. But in any rate, this current set up does not seem to me a proper use of disambiguation pages. Anyone who types in "St Petersburg," searching for the Florida locale, expects that they will need to take another step to disambiguate from the Russian destination. On the other hand, anyone typing in "St Petersburg," searching for the Russian destination, is going to be surprised and possibly offended by the disambiguation page. Lastly, I think this might be a good example of taking the Project:The traveller comes first concept too far. I don't think we should be writing a travel guide only for people who get to travel; travel guides are also for those who dream. And the majority of travelers visiting St Petersburg, FL are less likely to read our guide than those who either travel to or simply dream about the real St Petersburg. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald ^Talk 03:35, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

On another note, the notion that our guide is in English, therefore it is proper to be ethnocentric is very misguided. People the world over surf the English language web because it has far more content in greater detail than the web in their native language. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald ^Talk 03:38, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

If we are voting on this, then I 100% throw my support behind St. Petersburg in Russia being the main article and the city in Florida being classed as a disambiguate. As has been stated above, the Russian city is a world treasure and on an international scale can in no way can be compared to its name sake in the US. (WT-en) WindHorse 03:49, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

I will lay down in front of a moving tank before I will let you anti-American Russian Communist imperialists take away this disambiguation.* I'll explain my objections later.

* May not follow through with my threats and commentators may or may not actually be anti-American Russian Communist imperialists, but probably are. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 03:52, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

Ok, now that I'm interested again... I used to be very bothered that this didn't redirect to the Russian city, but now I'm not convinced doing so would be all that helpful. My friends and I went to "Tampa", but we once we got down there we were actually in a metropolis of Clearwater-St. Petersburg-Tampa. As, such if I were planning a trip to Clearwater-St. Petersburg-Tampa (Combined population of 600,000) I'd search for each city individually and would use "Saint Petersburg" in the search. The Russian city has about 4.2 million visitors annually, and I tried to compare that with St. Pete (Florida), but there didn't seem to be any quick references I could use, but I imagine those travelling to "Tampa" may also end up looking for information on Wikivoyage about Saint Petersburg also, that's why I prefer the status quo. There's really no harm in leaving this disambiguation page as-is and changing it may trip up users. Remember, not everyone using Wikivoyage is as savvy as those of us who know how to navigate the site, as Tim Wu demonstrated. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) •

OK, but now we are talking about two different issues: 1. whether giving precedence to one city (the most famous) makes it difficult to locate other cities of the same name, and 2. whether St. P (Russia) or St. P (Florida) is the the most popular destination for people using this site. If we concede the first argument, then we should change the system altogether and use a disambiguation page for all cities with the same name, and give none the main article status. However, personally, I wouldn't endorse that as obviously some cities are just so much more famous than their namesakes (eg: Boston, Mass vs Boston, England). As for the second point, if we see this guide as primarily serving the US, then maybe the two St. Petersburgs are on level footing (or perhaps even the Fl city should have precedence). However, if we consider it as a world guide (remember that many of the guides in other languages are far from complete, and as English is a global second language this site will be accessed by people far beyond the borders of the US), then there is no competition as I doubt that more than a very small number of people in Europe, the Indian sub-continent and the Far East have even heard of the Florida city, whereas the historic city on the Neva River is well known throughout the world. Anyway, that my point, but I will obviously bow to the general consensus. (WT-en) WindHorse 23:15, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

The most famous rule and St. Petersburg v. St. Petersburg are essentially the same thing. There's an indication that the Russian city is slightly more famous than its Floridian counterpart, but both cities are very well known. Google shows the Russian city with 8,600,000 hits, while the Floridian city has 5,250,000 hits. [3]. Yes, Google shows the Russian Saint Petersburg is slightly more famous, but this just isn't as clear a case as, say Columbus, Ohio v. Columbus (Georgia) [4]. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 23:53, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

I believe Windhorse's point is that despite any numbers from Google, outside of the US it's unlikely that people will have ever heard of St. Petersburg, Florida, and as such there would be absolutely no question about whether or not the Russian city should be disambiguated. I don't have much that's new to add to this discussion, so I'll leave it to others to hash out but I am personally strongly in favor of dropping the disambiguator for the Saint Petersburg (Russia) article since for the majority of the world (including much of the US) that is THE Saint Petersburg. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:08, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

Besides, Google hits are not at all an accurate measure because there will clearly be more hits for a US city than a Russian one, almost regardless of their comparative size and importance. The US is a wired country with individual sites for just about every restaurant and even individual person, whereas the vast majority of Russians lack personal internet connections. I am an American live in the US, have traveled to Florida several times, and did not actually know there was anything to the FL city other than a stolen famous name until I hit this disambiguator. St Petersburg, Russia, however, is familiar (and I might suggest alluring) to every person in the world who is interested at all in international travel.

Even if there were good statistics on visitors per year to both destinations, that still would overestimate the Florida city's importance to our guide. Far more people than those who actually get to travel to St Petersburg, Russia will check out its article simply because it makes for interesting travel reading. Only people who are actually going to the FL city would read its article and I would guess that many such visitors would not even bother to read a travel guide for an American beach resort. This is a good example of why statistics on page-views for our individual articles would be useful, but in their absence, it seems clear to me that common sense prefers we drop the disambiguator. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald ^Talk 11:47, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

And furthermore, anyone traveling to the Florida city "expects" to be tripped up by the fact that it has the same name as a very famous travel destination—they are invariably aware of the common name—while someone looking up the Russian city is quite likely unaware of the FL city altogether. No one should be too tripped up if there is a small disambig pointer at the top of the Russian article (e.g., looking for another St Petersburg?), especially since they will be expecting it. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald ^Talk 11:56, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

This is example of why a move would probably be inappropriate. If he can confuse Sydney with Sidney, Montana, then its possible that this disambiguation page would be helpful left as-is. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 17:52, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

Instead of pulling dubious stats out of Google hit numbers, or calling our own personal suppositions "common sense", how about some actual research? Such as this U.S. government study [5], which identifies St.Pete/Tampa as the 13th largest foreign tourism destination in the U.S.? Ahead of San Jose, Philly, Houston, Fort Lauderdale, Nawlins, Disney-West, Seattle, etc. Granted, it's only about half of "St.Pete/Tampa" (smaller population but more beachfront), but even by itself St.Pete would still be on par with the Twin Cities or Denver. Among foreigners, no less. The home of the Tsars is certainly going to win any sentimental popularity contest over a crowded modern tourist resort (heck, I'd much rather go to Russia too), but that's not the question, and the objective question of whether St.Pete is the travel-destination equivalent of Lebanon (Kansas), or Paris (Texas)... is a clear "no". - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 20:44, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

Many people have raised good points, but we are still no nearer making a decision on this. So, how about everyone taking a vote, and then allow the majority voice to be the deciding factor (closing date 18 May)? Is that an acceptable solution? (WT-en) WindHorse 21:06, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

No, it is not. We did reach a decision about this, at least once already. If you wish to change that, you need to develop a consensus for doing so. A simple majority vote does not establish a consensus. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 21:18, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

Votes make the Evan crazy so please don't go there. I endorse Todd's position. There are underinformed folks here in the states who will be thinking Florida, and it is a bigtime travel destination, so the "much more famous" rule does not apply. -- (WT-en) Colin 21:21, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

1.In favor of the two St. Petersburgs both having disambiguation status:

2.Establishing the Russian St. Petersburg as main article and the Florida city as a disambiguation:

• (WT-en) WindHorse 21:06, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

No, no, no, no. We're not going down the road Wikipedia has taken — majority rule, rather than consensus rule. As soon as we start voting then it snowballs and we start voting on other things. I'm afraid the voting idea is an ineffective option, which effectively permits people to ignore facts in order for their personal preference to become the standard. -- (WT-en) Sapphire �� (Talk) • 21:23, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

Hey guys, thanks for your prompt feedback. OK, no votes (and just when I was going to start the primaries rolling. Ha Ha). However, I do wonder, though, whether by using arguments such as 'uninformed Americans' might think of Florida not Russia when searching for St Petersburg as a criteria for deciding this matter are we not sending out a message that this guide is for Americans only. Don't forget that many contributors/readers are from the UK, Australia, India as well as other parts of the world, including Russia itself, no doubt. As English is the second language of the world, I personally view the guide as an international tool for all members of the world community, so whenever I edit an Indian or Nepalese article, for example, I always take into consideration Indian tourists or travelers from other countries, and not only the needs of Americans or even Westerners in general. Am I wrong to do so? In addition, I appreciate Todd finding the stats for the Florida city's foreign tourist ranking. However, I'm still not convinced that St.Petersburg plus Tampa being the 13th most popular destination for foreigner tourists in the US places it on a world ranking with its Russian counterpart. If it were the second or third, maybe - but not the 13th. Anyway, that's my final comment on the matter. As Sapphire said earlier, it is not a major issue, but still it is good to try to reach some kind of consensus. (WT-en) WindHorse 22:21, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

It's for uninformed Americans also. The only assumption we should make about people who use this guide is that they read English. Even if their lips move when they do so. A Buccaneers fan who didn't get the memo that Leningrad changed its name (again) has a much right to be taken directly to the city of his favorite baseball team's home stadium, as an afficionado of onion domes is entitled to be taken directly to the city on the Neva: i.e. none. We only skip disambiguation when it's obvious which one people are looking for, and with half a million non-Americans travelling to St.Pete/Tampa every year (not even counting the uninformed Americans), I don't think we can make any such assumption. No one's arguing that St.Pete is necessarily on par with Petrograd, simply that it's also a famous travel destination called Saint Petersburg, so we have to assume... nothing. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 23:06, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

Improper disambiguation

I object strongly to this renaming. Both the St Petersburg in Florida and the one in Russia are famous travel destinations, and our naming standards say that in such a situation, each of them should have a disambiguator on them and this page should be just St. Petersburg. It's not that I have anything against Petrograd or hold St Pete dearly in my heart (I found it painfully boring, but I'm not a typical resort tourist); it's just contrary to our standards. Read the comments above; I don't want to repeat myself any further. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 09:09, 27 July 2006 (EDT)

I've moved it to Saint Petersburg (Russia), which I think is the right spot for it (we typically expand St. and Mt. and such). --10:23, 27 July 2006 (EDT)

It's absolutely ridiculous to disambiguate this, it should obviously first point to the Russian city. (WT-en) globe-trotter 21:51, 2 January 2010 (EST)

You'll have to provide some reasoning for that, I think. Our guideline allows us to avoid disambiguation only when one destination is clearly, far and away, the most famous destination of that name. The fact that there's an argument here is a strong indication that that is not the case here. (WT-en) LtPowers 22:04, 2 January 2010 (EST)

Just the Hermitage in St. Petersburg already draws 3-4 million travelers annually. And I think it's also a mental thing: St. Petersburg is the second city of Russia and clearly one of the most well-known cities in Europe. I could easily name 30 cities in the US I'd earlier think about than St. Petersburg, Florida. For this reason, Wikipedia also directly points to the Russian city. Odessa also points to the city in Ukraine and not the one in Texas, and Venice also points to the one in Italy. (WT-en) globe-trotter 04:51, 7 January 2010 (EST)

Wikipedia's standards are different. Our bar has traditionally been set much higher, such that we only avoid disambiguation when one destination is indisputably the most likely target. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:22, 7 January 2010 (EST)

It still seems very much indisputable to me, for the long list of reasons above. The whole thread on this page blows my mind, and I'm sad to see there is still support for this disambiguation. It's a really embarrassing ethnocentrism, and one that doesn't even make sense from my perspective even if we were writing this guide just for Americans (we're actually writing for the entire English-speaking population of the world). --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 13:23, 7 January 2010 (EST)

The city in Florida is a major tourist destination. The fact that the city in Russia is more major is irrelevant based on our standards. And I don't care for the accusations of ethnocentrism. (WT-en) LtPowers 13:45, 7 January 2010 (EST)

.... And much of the city itself is a world heritage site, which given a short glance on the SP,Florida Wikipedia article, hardly is the case for the competitor. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) ^talk 13:48, 7 January 2010 (EST)

Saint Petersburg (Florida) is not even listed in the city list of Florida. (WT-en) globe-trotter 13:56, 7 January 2010 (EST)

In fame and tourism, Russia's St. Petersburg blows away Florida's. Even in Florida alone, St. Petersburg is not the top destination, let alone in the entire world. I like what we did with Panama City. It is the capital of Panama but also a well-known Florida destination (more well-known than St. Petersburg). Rather than linking to a disambiguation page, there is a disclaimer at the top. It's easy to spot.

Just like Panama deserves Panama City, I think Russia deserves St. Petersburg. I don't know anyone who hears St. Petersburg and does not think of Russia... (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 14:03, 7 January 2010 (EST)

No one's saying St. Petersburg, FL, is the top destination in the world, or in Florida for that matter. The point, which was made multiple times from what I've read above, is that it is a significant tourist destination, significant enough that we can't assume a reader is almost certain to be looking for the city in Russia. Panama City, I'd say, is borderline, but it's hard to compare it directly to St. Pete because the latter is part of a cluster of three popular cities while Panama City is all alone out on the panhandle. (WT-en) LtPowers 17:06, 7 January 2010 (EST)

But I disagree that it is significant. The previous discussion mentions google gives Florida, but if you type "Saint petersburg travel" or "guide" or something travel-related, Florida disappears. I'm an American, and I have never heard of St. Petersburg Florida. I think the significance of the Florida city is being augmented, perhaps because some users have been there? The Russian city is on equal footing with Moscow, Prague, Barcelona, (major world cities). The Florida destination? I think only those who research it will know about it. I'm not trying to say that it's not a nice destination; I have no idea. But I still don't buy the argument that this place is significant/important/known to the same or greater degree as Saint Petersburg, Russia. Do Australians know about the Floridian city? South Africans? Brits? Hawaiians? I would bet they will know the name, but associate it with Russia. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 17:47, 7 January 2010 (EST)

Ultimately, it will only be a matter of one additional click to get to the Florida city—either upon arriving at the default disambiguation page, or by clicking at the "were you looking for Saint Petersburg (Florida)" disambiguatory link at the top of the default article for the Russian city. The big difference is that the current default is going to offend people—it certainly offends me, for more than one reason. --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 19:10, 7 January 2010 (EST)

One could use that argument for any number of disambiguation pages. A Briton might be offended that Rochester doesn't go straight to the city in Kent, for instance. But I would question whether his skin might be a bit thin if he was. Certainly Saint Petersburg is a much more important and popular destination than Rochester, but the same principle applies -- we don't make article naming decisions based on who might be offended. (WT-en) LtPowers 21:36, 7 January 2010 (EST)

Wow — in my years on this site, somehow I'd failed to notice this. I'm in disbelief at the current setup — count me firmly in the camp for a "were you looking for Saint Petersburg (Florida)" link at the top, and Saint Petersburg pointing to the Russian city. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 21:48, 7 January 2010 (EST)

The argument that Saint Petersburg (Florida) is significant kinda turns into a moot-point as it isn't even listed in the Florida article. Apparently 9 other cities even in that state are more significant, and Sint Petersburg is not even listed on the Florida map. Now I know Florida has a lot to offer, but the comparison with Panama City (Florida) is striking. Panama City actually redirects to Panama City in Panama, while Panama City in Florida is more important than Sint Petersburg in Florida. On the other hand, St. Petersburg in Russia is way more important than Panama City in Panama. If we use that as example, I think the redirect should definitely go to the city in Russia. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:28, 11 January 2010 (EST)

I actually think we're coming to a good enough consensus to make this change, although it would be proper to wait a little longer to see if others want to comment and whether holdouts are willing to bow to a pretty broad majority opinion (on a small, but fairly charged issue on the part of those pro-change, it should be said). --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 15:58, 11 January 2010 (EST)

Well since Evan and Todd aren't around I guess I don't have much choice. But I am uncomfortable bowing out simply because my opponents feel strongly (and apparently emotionally) about the issue and I don't. On another note, I fail to understand Globe-trotter's point about Panama City. He should know that we do not select "nine cities" based only on how famous they are (and "famousness" is the metric our naming conventions prescribe). I suspect Saint Petersburg is not on the list of cities for Florida because it's part of the Tampa/St. Pete/Clearwater metro area and Tampa is already listed. Panama City, on the other hand, is separated from other destinations, and so is included for reasons of geographic representation. To draw a conclusion from that list of nine cities that Panama City is more famous than St. Petersburg is fallacious. Unfortunately, I've been unable to find any convenient ordered list of tourism destinations in Florida, so I have little in the way of counterargument. (WT-en) LtPowers 16:10, 11 January 2010 (EST)

a) That's not the point, and b) that's the polar opposite of your position re: Talk:Britain and Ireland#British Isles, in which case I think those that opposed your change had a much more important policy reason to do so (and yes, I agreed with you there). --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 16:43, 11 January 2010 (EST)

"British and Irish Isles" was not my best work. I thought it would be an acceptable compromise but was wrong. Unfortunately, I don't see much room for compromise here, so I'm not sure how the situations are comparable. (WT-en) LtPowers 17:01, 11 January 2010 (EST)

I don't feel particularly emotional about this issue, but it does seem a bit silly to disambiguate one of the world's most famous cities because a city in Florida attracts a not-insignificant number of visitors (due mostly I suspect to baseball and its proximity to more popular destinations). The argument that no one looking for the Florida city would be surprised to end up at an article for the Russian city (with a disambiguation notice at the top), but that folks looking for the Russian city might be very surprised to end up at the Florida city, seems to me a persuasive argument that in this case a disambiguation is unhelpful. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:16, 11 January 2010 (EST)

You're right that geographic distribution probably also plays an important role in that one. But when I read the policy, it is about "famousness". Unfortunately, this is obviously quite a subjective thing, and that's why there's such a big discussion here. Maybe there should be a way of "objectivitying" a discussion like this, or even a policy change that better prescribes what to do in a case like this. I don't think I'm emotional about it (but well, others can decide about that), but I think the Russian city is a whole lot more famous than the one in Florida. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 16:20, 11 January 2010 (EST)

I think we should adapt the policy "If in doubt, follow Wikipedia", when we have someone to argue things to death for us, why not take advantage when we can? :o) --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) ^talk 16:27, 11 January 2010 (EST)

Because Wikipedia isn't writing a travel guide, and the needs are different. (WT-en) LtPowers 16:29, 11 January 2010 (EST)

Hence only when in doubt, anyway, I'm all for Saint Pete going directly to the Russian city, if that wasn't obvious by now. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) ^talk 16:47, 11 January 2010 (EST)