![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The history info that has been added to this page comes from The City of Vaughan website. I assume that is probably a copyright violation. Adam Bishop 03:06, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I would contact the city to verify if the information posted can be used freely. spstarr 06:07, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
NOTE: I'm sure the city doesn't care, because mostly everything here is positive. I urge people to take a more critical look at this city. They will be appalled at what they find.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.184.151 ( talk) 22:40, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
I urge anybody who wants to here who wants to look deeper into the City of Vaughan to visit Vaughan Watch.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.184.151 ( talk) 22:36, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Check out Carrying Place Ratepayers Association—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.197.49.90 ( talk) 00:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Everything you write is biased so can we censor you? 20:16, 2 March 2006—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.239.249 ( talk)
I don't think you'll be interested after this November. 20:16, 2 March 2006—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.239.249 ( talk)
The main page (as presently edited) appears to identify the Mayor of Vaughan as someone other than the sidebar name. Lacking any verifiable evidence, I merely note this, and that I cannot justifiably edit it. -- Simon Cursitor 12:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Since when is the religions of Vaughan more important than the ethnic origins that live there. The big unnecessary chart of religions should be removed from the page. You can find a credible source of these statistics by going to the community profile page. Once your in Vaughan, on the right hand side, a bar states additional data. Clicking there, reveals a chart. by clicking on "ethnic origin" you find these numbers. there is no specific address. - Galati—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.157.203 ( talk) 05:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
1. Gretzky did not play in Vaughan, the team relocated from Vaughan to Toronto in 1974 and was known as the Toronto Nationals (later name changed to Toronto Young Nationals). 2. Auto. accident is not wiki worthy. I removed both from the article-- CharteredMember 02:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Do we really need the dab notice on the top? It would be relevant if Vaughan redirected here, but it doesn't. I rather doubt a user enetering Vaughan, Ontario would be interested in looking for Vaughan, Mississippi. Fishhead64 16:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
The map on this page isn't very useful. It has no points of reference, visual or textual. Perhaps if one is familiar with Vaughan it makes more sense, but this map is really not much more than a collection of seemingly meaningless shapes. Beaverfever 14:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Image:Yorkregionseal.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 11:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The pronunciation given in the article "/ˈvɔːn/" is just wrong. In Canadian English [ɔ] only occurs before [ɹ]. I think [ˈvɒːn] would be a better transcription. -- Lesouris ( talk) 22:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move. Mind matrix 15:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
This page should be renamed per the criteria at WP:CANSTYLE. It appears to be the primary use of the term Vaughan, and an internet search for the term, excluding the term "Ontario" to find occurrences not related to this city, yields numerous hits, all about people whose name contains Vaughan - they are not singularly known as Vaughan though. Vaughan, Mississippi is a small, unincorporated community, so should not prevent this page move. Other Wikipedia pages about Vaughan are either about subjects in the city itself (an electoral district, a mall etc.) or subjects whose name contains the word Vaughan. The dab page should be sufficient to handle these, and a hatnote to that dab page will be necessary Mind matrix 14:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Most articles on cities of Ontario use either a montage photo (eg. Toronto, Mississauga) or the city hall (eg. Markham, Richmond Hill, King) in the Infobox. The current photo (View from the top of Behemoth (Canada's Wonderland).jpg) has the Wonderland taking up half of the area, and the sky taking up most of the remaining area. If the Wonderland really should be used to represent Vaughan, we may as well use a better Wonderland photo. Raysonho ( talk) 03:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
The table at History_of_the_Jews_in_Canada#Canadian_Jews_today says that 12.6% of Vaughan’s residents are jewish, but according to Vaughan#Demographics 18.20% of the population adheres to Judaism . This is a large (50%) discrepancy. Any Comments? Ottawahitech ( talk) 15:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)please ping me
@ Ottawahitech: Yeah, it seemed kind of high... I found a source from StatsCan for religion with realistic numbers, as the religion paragraph didn't have a source before. [1] Vaselineeeeeeee ★★★ 15:16, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
So I see that the Order of Vaughan section has been called into question. While I do agree the people are not quite notable, TOoV does not seem to require a page to itself (yet). It seems like the Notable People section would be the best location for the honour, but perhaps should be renamed to People of Vaughan or something? Also to consider, the Wikipedia's Notability Guidelines do not apply to lists within articles; however, I am all ears to if there is a better spot to include this list in the Vaughan page. User:Lucky_mac11 16:05, 4 Feb, 2018 —Preceding undated comment added 21:06, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
If feel like the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre does not quite the definition of a community. I do think that VMC is very important to Vaughan, but maybe needs to be put into a new section, a section for Vaughan similar to what the public spaces section is in Toronto. Thoughts? Lucky mac11 ( talk) 02:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
I want to add something else about the communities in Vaughan. What defines a "major community"? Are they considered major if they were sizeable places prior to suburbanization? If so, Concord definitely fails to meet the criteria. And why are they said to contain smaller communities? How is Pine Grove part of Woodbridge or Edgeley, Concord? It seems wrongheaded (and unencyclopedic) to state as fact that Hwy. 400 and Major Mack is Woodbridge just because people don't care about their city's identity and need to "fill in the gaps". Mississauga is also a reorganized city, but people don't consider, say, Clarkson as extending for a ridiculously far distance to merge it with Streetsville. Transportfan70 ( talk) 04:10, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Moved from my talk page @ Vaselineeeeeeee: Salutations! I see that you have an issue with my SVG flag of Vaughan, Ontario which I made. Since I first made it I have corrected the leaf, colours and angles on the flag and it is continuously being taken down by you. I am not offended, I would just like you to tell me what it is missing or what is wrong so then we can use it and enjoy the quality of an SVG flag for the wiki! Happy editing! -- Cookieman1.1.1 ( talk) 13:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
Moved again. @ Vaselineeeeeeee: Salutations! I have fixed the flag of Vaughan, Ontario I made earlier. I fixed the colours, leaf and angles to match with the original however it is being continuously taken down by yourself with no explained other than "its crappy" etc. I am not mad, I would just like to hear what you yourself think or know what is wrong so then i may fix the SVG and then we can all enjoy the vector quality with the rest of the wiki! Let me know :) -- Cookieman1.1.1 ( talk) 13:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Participants in the discussion emphasized that this city is the most important place to be called Vaughan, and thus "Vaughan" was found to be the preferable title per WP:CANSTYLE. Some users argued that the surname "Vaughan" was the true primary topic, but pageview analysis did not support that argument. ( non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 15:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Vaughan → Vaughan, Ontario – First, to make a place entry consistent with all other "Vaughan" place entries; "Vaughan", Ontario, is not of the same status as Paris, Moscow, or London. Second, to free up "Vaughan" page for redirect to Vaughan (disambiguation) so that the (overwhelming majority of) users who come to Wikipedia seeking something with the name Vaughan in it other than Vaughan, Ontario, may be spared having to spelunk around the Vaughan, Ontario, page for a redirect to find what they are after. Wikiuser100 ( talk) 14:45, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED. No consensus. Hadal ( talk) 17:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
– The city in Canada is certainly a popular encyclopedic topic, but it does not rise to the standard described at
WP:PTOPIC - it does not have a long-term significance or usage that is larger than all the other topics known as Vaughan. This is primarily because the human names are actually way more commonly known and associated with the term compared to the city.
The previous discussions about this were flawed IMHO because folks seemed to make a lot of unsupported assumptions about average reader behavior. Assertions were made that only well-documented mononymous usage is relevant, but I do not believe this is so - it is very common for surnames and given names to be used mononymously, even if they are naturally disambiguated in real life. Likewise, raw statistics were analyzed, but nobody seems to have gone into the overall body of statistics, which shows a substantially different picture.
For example,
WikiNav for Vaughan shows the hatnote gets only 105 clicks out of a total incoming traffic of 8.8k (~1%), and the set indexes for the surname and the given name likewise don't get a lot of traffic. However, it is still in the top 10 list of outgoing traffic, and I would contend that this mainly demonstrates how we and the search engines navigate readers, as opposed to how they would naturally navigate. We effectively hid the anthroponymy behind a hatnote and listed it in the fifth subsection there, after various smaller places etc. So
mass views for that page will show what it shows, with the city's 338 views a day looking dominant. But when you look at
mass views for the surname and the
mass views for the given name it's apparent that Vince at 5,764 / day, Stevie Ray at 3,234 / day, Robert at 2,122 / day, Matthew at 1,635 / day, ... and numerous others, including Vaughan Williams at 626 / day, all the way down to Frankie at 177 / day, and in turn the long tail after that, are all as a whole commanding a huge amount of reader attention. This amount is so large that it casts a substantial amount of doubt in any claim that when an average reader looks up "Vaughan" they by default mean the city.
Now, it's possible to claim that when the average reader thinks about what they would expect in an encyclopedia for "Vaughan", they might expect the city. However, I can't find other examples in support of that - a search for "Vaughan" in britannica.com does not short-circuit to the city (the dropdown shows people, while full results show an assortment of results, a fair few of which are about Canada too, yet it didn't show the city as such near the top). Likewise, the searches at encyclopedia.com and Columbia Encyclopedia (infoplease.com) mostly show people. Ditto for Google Books with pws=0.
So, I'm proposing that we disambiguate this at the base name and void the assumption of primary topic for the city. Worst case, in a couple of months time WikiNav will tell us that e.g. people are actually clicking the city's entry so much that it dwarfs all the other uses, and it'll be easy enough to revert or place a primary redirect based on that.
TIA. --
Joy (
talk) 09:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC) — Relisting.
Steel1943 (
talk)
06:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Target article | Status quo | Move |
---|---|---|
Vaughan | Reached target | Follow 1 link (dab page -> target) |
Entries in Vaughan (given name) | Follow 2 links (hatnote -> given name dab page -> target) | Follow 2 links (dab page -> given name dab page -> target) |
Entries in Vaughan (surname) | Follow 2 links (hatnote -> surname dab page -> target) | Follow 2 links (dab page -> surname dab page -> target) |
Entries in Vaughan (disambiguation) | Follow 2 links (hatnote -> dab page -> target) | Follow 1 link (dab page -> target) |
I've had a look at https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Vaughan again and it seems to have been affected by this change in February; the April stats say that now the surname hatnote is in the top 10 (at #10) with 64 clicks, the given name came hatnote in at #12 with 52 clicks, while the generic hatnote came in at #13 with 52 clicks. Their sum is now 168, which is 64% more than the previous data in February (102). There was some incoming view growth from 8.8k to 9k, so I guess we can dock 3% off that. Still, it's hard to see cause and effect just from this - as these were effectively promoted by getting a place very high up there. -- Joy ( talk) 14:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The history info that has been added to this page comes from The City of Vaughan website. I assume that is probably a copyright violation. Adam Bishop 03:06, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I would contact the city to verify if the information posted can be used freely. spstarr 06:07, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
NOTE: I'm sure the city doesn't care, because mostly everything here is positive. I urge people to take a more critical look at this city. They will be appalled at what they find.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.184.151 ( talk) 22:40, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
I urge anybody who wants to here who wants to look deeper into the City of Vaughan to visit Vaughan Watch.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.184.151 ( talk) 22:36, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Check out Carrying Place Ratepayers Association—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.197.49.90 ( talk) 00:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Everything you write is biased so can we censor you? 20:16, 2 March 2006—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.239.249 ( talk)
I don't think you'll be interested after this November. 20:16, 2 March 2006—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.239.249 ( talk)
The main page (as presently edited) appears to identify the Mayor of Vaughan as someone other than the sidebar name. Lacking any verifiable evidence, I merely note this, and that I cannot justifiably edit it. -- Simon Cursitor 12:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Since when is the religions of Vaughan more important than the ethnic origins that live there. The big unnecessary chart of religions should be removed from the page. You can find a credible source of these statistics by going to the community profile page. Once your in Vaughan, on the right hand side, a bar states additional data. Clicking there, reveals a chart. by clicking on "ethnic origin" you find these numbers. there is no specific address. - Galati—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.157.203 ( talk) 05:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
1. Gretzky did not play in Vaughan, the team relocated from Vaughan to Toronto in 1974 and was known as the Toronto Nationals (later name changed to Toronto Young Nationals). 2. Auto. accident is not wiki worthy. I removed both from the article-- CharteredMember 02:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Do we really need the dab notice on the top? It would be relevant if Vaughan redirected here, but it doesn't. I rather doubt a user enetering Vaughan, Ontario would be interested in looking for Vaughan, Mississippi. Fishhead64 16:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
The map on this page isn't very useful. It has no points of reference, visual or textual. Perhaps if one is familiar with Vaughan it makes more sense, but this map is really not much more than a collection of seemingly meaningless shapes. Beaverfever 14:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Image:Yorkregionseal.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 11:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The pronunciation given in the article "/ˈvɔːn/" is just wrong. In Canadian English [ɔ] only occurs before [ɹ]. I think [ˈvɒːn] would be a better transcription. -- Lesouris ( talk) 22:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move. Mind matrix 15:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
This page should be renamed per the criteria at WP:CANSTYLE. It appears to be the primary use of the term Vaughan, and an internet search for the term, excluding the term "Ontario" to find occurrences not related to this city, yields numerous hits, all about people whose name contains Vaughan - they are not singularly known as Vaughan though. Vaughan, Mississippi is a small, unincorporated community, so should not prevent this page move. Other Wikipedia pages about Vaughan are either about subjects in the city itself (an electoral district, a mall etc.) or subjects whose name contains the word Vaughan. The dab page should be sufficient to handle these, and a hatnote to that dab page will be necessary Mind matrix 14:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Most articles on cities of Ontario use either a montage photo (eg. Toronto, Mississauga) or the city hall (eg. Markham, Richmond Hill, King) in the Infobox. The current photo (View from the top of Behemoth (Canada's Wonderland).jpg) has the Wonderland taking up half of the area, and the sky taking up most of the remaining area. If the Wonderland really should be used to represent Vaughan, we may as well use a better Wonderland photo. Raysonho ( talk) 03:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
The table at History_of_the_Jews_in_Canada#Canadian_Jews_today says that 12.6% of Vaughan’s residents are jewish, but according to Vaughan#Demographics 18.20% of the population adheres to Judaism . This is a large (50%) discrepancy. Any Comments? Ottawahitech ( talk) 15:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)please ping me
@ Ottawahitech: Yeah, it seemed kind of high... I found a source from StatsCan for religion with realistic numbers, as the religion paragraph didn't have a source before. [1] Vaselineeeeeeee ★★★ 15:16, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
So I see that the Order of Vaughan section has been called into question. While I do agree the people are not quite notable, TOoV does not seem to require a page to itself (yet). It seems like the Notable People section would be the best location for the honour, but perhaps should be renamed to People of Vaughan or something? Also to consider, the Wikipedia's Notability Guidelines do not apply to lists within articles; however, I am all ears to if there is a better spot to include this list in the Vaughan page. User:Lucky_mac11 16:05, 4 Feb, 2018 —Preceding undated comment added 21:06, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
If feel like the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre does not quite the definition of a community. I do think that VMC is very important to Vaughan, but maybe needs to be put into a new section, a section for Vaughan similar to what the public spaces section is in Toronto. Thoughts? Lucky mac11 ( talk) 02:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
I want to add something else about the communities in Vaughan. What defines a "major community"? Are they considered major if they were sizeable places prior to suburbanization? If so, Concord definitely fails to meet the criteria. And why are they said to contain smaller communities? How is Pine Grove part of Woodbridge or Edgeley, Concord? It seems wrongheaded (and unencyclopedic) to state as fact that Hwy. 400 and Major Mack is Woodbridge just because people don't care about their city's identity and need to "fill in the gaps". Mississauga is also a reorganized city, but people don't consider, say, Clarkson as extending for a ridiculously far distance to merge it with Streetsville. Transportfan70 ( talk) 04:10, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Moved from my talk page @ Vaselineeeeeeee: Salutations! I see that you have an issue with my SVG flag of Vaughan, Ontario which I made. Since I first made it I have corrected the leaf, colours and angles on the flag and it is continuously being taken down by you. I am not offended, I would just like you to tell me what it is missing or what is wrong so then we can use it and enjoy the quality of an SVG flag for the wiki! Happy editing! -- Cookieman1.1.1 ( talk) 13:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
Moved again. @ Vaselineeeeeeee: Salutations! I have fixed the flag of Vaughan, Ontario I made earlier. I fixed the colours, leaf and angles to match with the original however it is being continuously taken down by yourself with no explained other than "its crappy" etc. I am not mad, I would just like to hear what you yourself think or know what is wrong so then i may fix the SVG and then we can all enjoy the vector quality with the rest of the wiki! Let me know :) -- Cookieman1.1.1 ( talk) 13:57, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Participants in the discussion emphasized that this city is the most important place to be called Vaughan, and thus "Vaughan" was found to be the preferable title per WP:CANSTYLE. Some users argued that the surname "Vaughan" was the true primary topic, but pageview analysis did not support that argument. ( non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 15:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Vaughan → Vaughan, Ontario – First, to make a place entry consistent with all other "Vaughan" place entries; "Vaughan", Ontario, is not of the same status as Paris, Moscow, or London. Second, to free up "Vaughan" page for redirect to Vaughan (disambiguation) so that the (overwhelming majority of) users who come to Wikipedia seeking something with the name Vaughan in it other than Vaughan, Ontario, may be spared having to spelunk around the Vaughan, Ontario, page for a redirect to find what they are after. Wikiuser100 ( talk) 14:45, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED. No consensus. Hadal ( talk) 17:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
– The city in Canada is certainly a popular encyclopedic topic, but it does not rise to the standard described at
WP:PTOPIC - it does not have a long-term significance or usage that is larger than all the other topics known as Vaughan. This is primarily because the human names are actually way more commonly known and associated with the term compared to the city.
The previous discussions about this were flawed IMHO because folks seemed to make a lot of unsupported assumptions about average reader behavior. Assertions were made that only well-documented mononymous usage is relevant, but I do not believe this is so - it is very common for surnames and given names to be used mononymously, even if they are naturally disambiguated in real life. Likewise, raw statistics were analyzed, but nobody seems to have gone into the overall body of statistics, which shows a substantially different picture.
For example,
WikiNav for Vaughan shows the hatnote gets only 105 clicks out of a total incoming traffic of 8.8k (~1%), and the set indexes for the surname and the given name likewise don't get a lot of traffic. However, it is still in the top 10 list of outgoing traffic, and I would contend that this mainly demonstrates how we and the search engines navigate readers, as opposed to how they would naturally navigate. We effectively hid the anthroponymy behind a hatnote and listed it in the fifth subsection there, after various smaller places etc. So
mass views for that page will show what it shows, with the city's 338 views a day looking dominant. But when you look at
mass views for the surname and the
mass views for the given name it's apparent that Vince at 5,764 / day, Stevie Ray at 3,234 / day, Robert at 2,122 / day, Matthew at 1,635 / day, ... and numerous others, including Vaughan Williams at 626 / day, all the way down to Frankie at 177 / day, and in turn the long tail after that, are all as a whole commanding a huge amount of reader attention. This amount is so large that it casts a substantial amount of doubt in any claim that when an average reader looks up "Vaughan" they by default mean the city.
Now, it's possible to claim that when the average reader thinks about what they would expect in an encyclopedia for "Vaughan", they might expect the city. However, I can't find other examples in support of that - a search for "Vaughan" in britannica.com does not short-circuit to the city (the dropdown shows people, while full results show an assortment of results, a fair few of which are about Canada too, yet it didn't show the city as such near the top). Likewise, the searches at encyclopedia.com and Columbia Encyclopedia (infoplease.com) mostly show people. Ditto for Google Books with pws=0.
So, I'm proposing that we disambiguate this at the base name and void the assumption of primary topic for the city. Worst case, in a couple of months time WikiNav will tell us that e.g. people are actually clicking the city's entry so much that it dwarfs all the other uses, and it'll be easy enough to revert or place a primary redirect based on that.
TIA. --
Joy (
talk) 09:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC) — Relisting.
Steel1943 (
talk)
06:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Target article | Status quo | Move |
---|---|---|
Vaughan | Reached target | Follow 1 link (dab page -> target) |
Entries in Vaughan (given name) | Follow 2 links (hatnote -> given name dab page -> target) | Follow 2 links (dab page -> given name dab page -> target) |
Entries in Vaughan (surname) | Follow 2 links (hatnote -> surname dab page -> target) | Follow 2 links (dab page -> surname dab page -> target) |
Entries in Vaughan (disambiguation) | Follow 2 links (hatnote -> dab page -> target) | Follow 1 link (dab page -> target) |
I've had a look at https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Vaughan again and it seems to have been affected by this change in February; the April stats say that now the surname hatnote is in the top 10 (at #10) with 64 clicks, the given name came hatnote in at #12 with 52 clicks, while the generic hatnote came in at #13 with 52 clicks. Their sum is now 168, which is 64% more than the previous data in February (102). There was some incoming view growth from 8.8k to 9k, so I guess we can dock 3% off that. Still, it's hard to see cause and effect just from this - as these were effectively promoted by getting a place very high up there. -- Joy ( talk) 14:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC)