Hi, I saw that you reverted / partly reverted all my edits on the Area 51 games. The issue is that 99% of users that search for Area 51 will want the 2005 game, but currently we send them to the 1995 game. Shouldn't the most popular game be the standard?
Topic on User talk:Rose
Hello. The disambig template is not meant to link to all games with similar titles like you did. We could improve the description of each of the current two but it's the series box that covers all games of the Area 51 series and allows the reader to easily navigate between them.
The naming of the articles is something to discuss within the talk pages of the relevant articles for more users to notice. Personally, I'm not familiar with the games to argue one way or another but it's otherwise consistent to give priority to the first released game.
At the moment, searching "Area 51" will direct you first to the 1995 game, with a redirect link only to the 2019 game. Only after clicking on the link to the article for the 2019 game does one get a link to the 2005 game.
Look at the article for the 2005 game, and compare it to the 1995 game and the 2019 game. The 2005 game is well-documented, has a number of fixes, and links to a mod that provides better support for modern high resolutions. The other games have basically no information whatsoever. Does this not clearly show which game should be prioritised in search results?
It is something worth a global discussion to be raised on the forums or the article talk page. You have a point and it does raise the question of whether we go by the chronological order, prominence outside of the wiki or go by completion which is always subject to change as the community contributes more information.
Does everything need to be so bogged down by bureaucracy? Even in a wiki for PC game troubleshooting? Why is it that anything which a clear answer needs to be discussed by some politburo ad infinitum so that the beneficial change can never be made? Or until those willing to make the change become disinterested?
I wasn't merely referencing article completion, I was using it as a metric as to which game of the three is the most popular. I think one look at the three articles to see which game actually has people playing it would be more illuminating than discussing a default site-wide policy.
It would be understandable to have the first game in a franchise be prioritised when there are newer games with the same name; technically, Area 51 2005 is part of the same series as the 1995 light-gun game. But why does the article for the 1995 game offer a link only to the completely unrelated 2019 game?
Precedents matter. Considering PCGW does not currently have dedicated disambig pages, the way to realize your idea would be to rename Area 51 to Area 51 (1995) and have the original page redirect to Area 51 (2005). From there, one could argue that any currently popular game can simply take over any other games of identical titles. We would then need a metric to effectively and objectively resolve disputes of this nature.
The alternative solution would be to make no change to the article titles but link from the disambig template (even though all the games are already linked through the series box below the infobox). This would increase the prominence of the wanted article at the cost of repetition and at the risk of the disambig template listing all games, effectively defeating the purpose of the series box (part of the original cause of this discussion).
Honestly, the series box is small and kind of hidden on the right side, you have to scroll down to even get to it. Most people won't even see it.