Talk:Orlando

On 16 April 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Orlando (disambiguation) to Orlando. The result of the discussion was moved.

Untitled

Not as that anyone who hasn't read the book would notice -- Orlando is actually about the history of English Literature. He becomes a 'she' as women become to figure more importantly in the world of Letters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparky (talk • contribs) 14:49, 10 December 2003

True or false??

True or false: this article belongs at Orlando (disambiguation) with Orlando being a re-direct to Orlando, Florida. 66.245.18.193 15:03, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Moved most of the topics to the new disambiguation page - however, I tried to keep everything connected to what appears to be the 'root' meaning of Orlando on the Orlando page itself. (Orlando, Florida, was named after a guy who had Orlando as first name, who normally would have gotten his first name as a far derivation from Orlando/Roland character). So no automatic "redirect" to Florida please: when checking "what links here" non-"Orlando, Florida" references appeared quite frequent (I already adapted several of these so they would direct to the correct article directly). I suppose outside Florida (or US?) Orlando is probably more often used not to refer to the American city. Orlando is a very central theme in the whole of Renaissance culture, and the Orlando novel is one of the absolute "musts" of 20th century literature, etc... --Francis Schonken 10:02, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

66.167.139.240 03:57, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC): Even after some clean up done by User:Francis Schonken and myself, it's clear that there are a lot more contributions to Wikipedia that use Orlando to refer to Orlando, Florida instead of Orlando (character) (blame Disney World, perhaps). For now, I've simply created Orlando (character) and redirected Orlando to it, as a compromise. Having the character in a separate article makes it easier to deal with later, as contributions continue.

--Francis Schonken 05:18, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC):

Minor adjustments:

-> Orlando: redirect to disambig page seems more logical now;

-> Re-grouped disambig page, City on top;

-> Orlando (character): always: AND MUSIC...

It's not so much how important Orlando, FL is, it's how unimportant the others are. There's almost literally nothing else that has a legitimate claim to the name. Keep in mind the language of the encyclopedia is in fact English, not Italian or Spanish. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 05:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that the other meanings are unimportant. It depends on your level of culture. But to avoid a reversion war, I'll leave it to someone else to revert your reversion of my reversion! Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The disamb page lists six things (not counting the city) that would normally be referred to as "Orlando" without a qualifier or other descriptive word (as opposed to, say, Orlando Bloom).

A seemingly unimportant film
A seemingly unimportant band
A seemingly unimportant 1960's TV series
The cat from a series of illustrated books
The name of a character in a Shakespeare play
One of Handel's operas (and not an especially important one)

Which of the following matters (regardless of culture)? I assume you must mean the Handel opera... but seriously? A minor opera (even one written by someone as famous as Handel) isn't really that big of a deal notability-wise. I guarantee you that most people typing in "orlando" are NOT looking for that page. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orlando (name)

To be more in line with what the other name articles are like, I made a red link near the top of this article for Orlando (name). Ideally this would talk about the origins of the name, etc. Also, I've removed the list of the people named Orlando from here, as they would go in that Orlando (name) article. I might create a stub later, but, you know, maybe not. Recury 18:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Orlando massacre

@Red Slash: Per WP:BRD I do not revert, but I see it really unconstructive that you removed the Orlando massacre after @BD2412 and Parsley Man: (and me) didn't seem to have any problems with it. The massacre is globally very often just cited as "Orlando" [1] and as people usually don't know about the obscure naming conventions[2][3]… in Wikipedia, they will often show up here to look for it. We should really have this link as a service for the readers. --S I 09:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if the general consensus is against it, that's fine by me. I just think of it as an unlikely place to list what I would search for as the Orlando shooting Red Slash 02:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 August 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved per WP:SNOW. SST flyer 01:21, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orlando (disambiguation) → Orlando – "Orlando" should not redirect to Orlando, Florida because I don't think it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. And there is more than one place called "Orlando". 31.52.4.146 (talk) 12:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose move - it's a clear primary topic. The fact there's more than one place named Orlando is irrelevant. ONR (talk) 16:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Another poor move request from this IP. I suggest we just start instantly closing these. Nohomersryan (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support move: the city is known as "Orlando, Florida", not "Orlando". There are too many other important uses - Shakespearean character, Virginia Woolf novel, etc - for a single American city to claim Primary Topic status. PamD 09:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move. The existence of other articles doesn't prevent the Florida city from being the primary topic. Page view statistics [4] show the city is clearly the primary topic. Calidum ¤ 15:02, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – City is hands down primary topic for the "Orlando" term. Sure, it's a popular name, and the dab page does the job. — JFG ^talk 23:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Once again, this IP is making disruptive request right after their block expired. The IP address has cited no evidence that the city is not primary topic for the term Orlando. ^Ḉɱ̍ 2nd anniv. 17:16, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I'd like to see a topic ban on move requests and blocking the page move feature for this IP user, but is that even technically possible or do we need this editor to open an account? — JFG ^talk 06:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we could do so Calidum ¤ 03:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 16 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 03:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orlando (disambiguation) → Orlando – I realise that this was discussed before in 2016, but consensus may have changed. A recent discussion at Talk:Orlando, Florida showed no consensus that this is the primary topic. I would put forward two reasons. Firstly, the sheer number of entries on this page means that we should be cautious about deciding that there is a primary topic. Secondly, some people argued that the Florida city is widely known outside the USA because it attracts a large number of tourists as the location of Disney World. However, speaking as a European who has never visited the USA, the extent to which US cities are widely known elsewhere is not necessarily a function of the number of tourists, it's not like e.g. Chicago or Los Angeles. PatGallacher (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support I agree the city is the most common use but as noted it doesn't appear to be significantly more so and as noted in the 2016 discussion its common for US cities to be called with the state. And as a side note I was wondering about submitting this RM but its now already done. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There's no evidence that the Florida city is not the primary topic here and if it weren't for WP:USPLACE it would be at the base name already. The number of page views Orlando Bloom gets is irrelevant here. No one looking for his page would reasonably look up just Orlando. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 18:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jessintime actually, that last part is not necessarily true. At this point we have reasonably certain examples where given names are habitually used by significant contingents of readers to navigate to people's biographies, despite there being primary topics and/or very popular eponymous topics, cf. Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation/Archive 56#on the quality of clickstream and pageviews usage data, Talk:Charlotte#post-move etc. --Joy (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Crouch, Swale above. ╠╣uw [talk] 18:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The city seems like the clear primary topic here, seemingly with more views than the other primary topics combined. It is also a major US city, not a middle-of-nowhere town, and Wikipedia is not obligated to change its policies simply because people might have a poor grasp of geography. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. As the person who just proposed the RM to move the city to the base name, I still argue it’s the primary topic for simply “Orlando”. And as Jessintime said, if it weren’t for the poorly made guideline that is WP:USPLACE, the city’s article would be at its proper place of Orlando. True CRaysball | ^#RaysUp 22:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination; Crouch, Swale and ╠╣uw. No need for the parenthetical qualifier "(disambiguation)". There are 40 entries listed upom the Orlando (disambiguation) page, with little indication that the putative WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT of Orlando to Orlando, Florida exceeds the combined renown of the remaining 39 entries. Those researching the Florida location can always access it directly by simply typing "Orlando, Florida". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sheer numbers are typically poor indicators of wide familiarity for a locality. Particularly if the locality lies in a populous country or region. A lot of the hits will be merely local people looking it up for directions to something or other. In other words, lots of people live in Florida, and they are driving a lot of the pageviews. It doesn't really reflect its recognizability globally. Given that the numbers for Orlando Florida are not as outsized as all that relative to the rest, I'd prefer disambiguation. Walrasiad (talk) 07:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I prefer to error on the side of primary topic with respect to long-term significance, in which no "Orlando" topic has that type of long-term significance to warrant the primary topic. We have about 40 entries listed on the Orlando (disambiguation) page. We further have numerous notable people listed on both Orlando (given name) and Orlando (surname). And as detailed on Orlando, Florida#Etymology, the city was apparently named after some person named Orlando, although the "origin of the name is unknown but at least five stories relate how Orlando got its name", including the possibility the city was named after Orlando (As You Like It). Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a case of a primary redirect, so we actually get a little bit more data to work with to try to understand primary topic by usage. This is the graph of monthly page views for the primary redirect, where we can see:

Expand for page views raw data

2023-10: 3499

2023-11: 3228

2023-12: 3766

2024-01: 4016

2024-02: 3457

2024-03: 3936

The Special:WhatLinksHere/Orlando page tells us there are incoming links to the primary redirect, in fact linkcount says as many as 1782. That's a generator of traffic to an extent for sure. The rest of it would presumably be mostly readers organically typing "Orlando" into the search box.

Now, the destination page attracts a lot of organic reader traffic as well, and we can at least try to compare traffic trends between the short term and the long term: this is monthly page views for both. Because of the sheer difference in scale, you have to click Logarithmic scale to get to see the variations in short term traffic in a comparable manner. To me it seems that sometimes these graphs match very well, but often times their trends also differ.

To try to figure out how many people go to "Orlando" and then reach for the hatnote, we can try to have a look at an the meta:Research:Wikipedia clickstreams, visualised at WikiNav for Orlando for last month. Here's the data for the last few months:

Expand for clickstream-enwiki-*.tsv data for traffic where source is Orlando, Florida and destination is disambigation page

clickstream-enwiki-2023-10.tsv:

Orlando,_Florida Orlando_(disambiguation) link 466
total: 17335

clickstream-enwiki-2023-11.tsv:

Orlando,_Florida Orlando_(disambiguation) link 422
total: 18046

clickstream-enwiki-2023-12.tsv:

Orlando,_Florida Orlando_(disambiguation) link 480
total: 21517

clickstream-enwiki-2024-01.tsv:

Orlando,_Florida Orlando_(disambiguation) link 609
total: 22651

clickstream-enwiki-2024-02.tsv:

Orlando,_Florida Orlando_(disambiguation) link 453
total: 20100

clickstream-enwiki-2024-03.tsv:

Orlando,_Florida Orlando_(disambiguation) link 502
total: 21668

Using these numbers is obviously not precise for our consideration, for multiple reasons:

any small number of people generally arriving at the city page from whichever route could be clicking the hatnote
there's also anonymization thresholds in the clickstream mechanism that could well be obscuring some of the traffic
the city article is a big and popular article anyway, so the total outgoing clickstreams are largely unrelated to the hatnote
likewise, the total incoming views are around ~65k, where ~30k is known to be brought in by external search engines, so we don't necessarily know the context, they don't have to be related to just searches of the short term "Orlando", rather it could be something similar or derived from other variables search engines know about visitors (like their locations or interests)

But, it's the best we've got and we can at least compare these flawed numbers with analogous flawed numbers from other cases, and try to read the leaves from that. So let's look at the ratios:

Expand for percentage calculation of redirect views vs clickstreams towards the hatnote

2023-10: 466 / 3499 = ~13.3%

2023-11: 422 / 3228 = ~13.1%

2023-12: 480 / 3766 = ~12.8%

2024-01: 609 / 4016 = ~15.2%

2024-02: 453 / 3457 = ~13.1%

2024-03: 502 / 3936 = ~12.8%

That's pretty stable, though when we see a small traffic spike like January, it also rises. Taken literally, this would mean that around 13% of readers could consistently be needing to reach for the navigation aid, while around 87% of them are not doing that. Now, even if these numbers were precise, we wouldn't know the reasons for the reader behavior - for example we wouldn't know if some of these were misclicks, nor would we know if people who get navigated wrongly just gave up and went away without reaching for the navigation aid (while still getting counted as 'views' of the city page through the redirect).

How many readers reaching for the navigation aid constitutes a possible problem? We don't really know. I previously used ~90% as the point where it's hard to doubt it - if there's a difference of an order of magnitude, it's probably fine, otherwise we ponder it. A recent example where this seems to have been sound was Talk:Rubens (disambiguation).

Now, once these readers who reach for the navigation aid end up at the disambiguation page, we can try to see what they do there from WikiNav for the disambiguation page for last month:

Expand for clickstream-enwiki-*.tsv data for traffic where source is Orlando (disambiguation)

clickstream-enwiki-2024-03.tsv:

Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando:_A_Biography link 154
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando_(given_name) link 122
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando_(film) link 86
Orlando_(disambiguation) Roland link 41
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando_(surname) link 38
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando_(As_You_Like_It) link 36
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando,_Florida link 25
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando,_Soweto link 15
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando_Township,_Cheyenne_County,_Kansas link 14
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando_(band) link 11
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando,_Oklahoma link 11
Orlando_(disambiguation) Orlando,_Kentucky link 10
total: 563

(The long-term significance of a lot of these topics is quite obviously comparable to that of the city, if not obviously larger, which reinforces the idea to ponder a change.)

A recent possibly comparable example has been "Charlotte", described at Talk:Charlotte. It's also a well-known big city and a well-known human name. There, we had a rather contentious discussion but also a rather positive outcome - after trying the change, we found that presenting the readers with a list did not result in the same kind of ratios, rather only a plurality or a minority of readers went for the old primary topic, while many others navigated to other topics.

I've also discussed a number of other cases at WT:D that were like that, so I'd be hopeful in this case, too. I think we should engage in this kind of an experiment over here. (Support) Worst case, we end up disambiguating ~1.7k links, which is probably good anyway, and reverting the redirect after a few months of readers looking for the city having to just click the first item in the list, and this isn't really a bad thing anyway (we regularly force a lot more readers to do that in other cases, like New York).

--Joy (talk) 08:06, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support: people accustomed to looking for US cities will search for Orlando, Florida because they know that's how we title articles on almost all US cities. Presence of a major tourist attraction is not enough to give this place priority over the many other uses, especially Shakespeare character, Woolf novel, and cat. There is nothing to indicate that the city is the primary topic, although it might merit a stand-out "commonly refers to" link at the top of the page as is often done for something which, while not primary, is major. PamD 09:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to confirm, the latter practice is described in the disambiguation ordering section of the manual of style, MOS:DABCOMMON. --Joy (talk) 13:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I still intuitively feel like the city is the primary topic, but Joy's reasoning has convinced me that an experiment could be worth doing. If we find after a few months that the city does indeed get a majority of traffic, then we can start a new RM to revert the move. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. A Google search for Orlando demonstrates the city is the overwhelming primary topic. I appreciate the work Joy has done, but the data we have is extremely limited because most people get to our articles directly from search engines. Google knows to send everyone to Orlando, Florida directly, and that nobody wants the Orlando redirect. But our job is to serve the few who do type “Orlando” into our search, and we have no reason to believe our searchers are significantly different from Google searchers in terms of what they’re seeking when searching with “Orlando”. And that’s the topic of this article. —В²C ☎ 06:21, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Born2cycle well, the problem is that statistics say that we might have reason to believe that, to a similar extent they had maybe said that for 'Charlotte'. I know my various diatribes are rather intricate, so let me try a more visual demonstration: let's compare the same monthly page view statistics for the primary redirect and the hatnote destination from here and from there. The trend is basically the same - it looks like the hatnote doesn't receive a whole lot of interest from readers, right?

But, once we offered those readers a choice, the situation flipped on its head and we learned that no, they don't all go for the previously presumed primary topic.

If we add the cities to the graph, the trend is also practically the same - the city traffic just dwarfs the hatnote traffic.

When the long-term significance of topics named X is not obviously clear, while a primary topic/redirect is in place, the raw level of organic traffic is just not a reliable predictor for the choices readers make when looking up X alone. --Joy (talk) 12:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I absolutely think of Orlando Bloom before I think of the city, which I barely think of. I am interested in how other people think of this in the context of living in or outside of the USA. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 11:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Notcharizard "Oppose" means to keep the status quo where Orlando leads to the US city, and readers wanting Bloom or other uses have to follow a hatnote link to get to the disambiguation page. Is that what you intended? PamD 12:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, don't know how I got that confused there! -- NotCharizard ^🗨 14:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware that WP:PRIMARYTOPICs are not determined by ”what first comes to (your) mind"?— В²C ☎ 16:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The city is the primary topic by long-term significance and by usage ([5]). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shhhnotsoloud the problem with that list, as usual, is WP:NAMELIST - you have to separately go to [6] and [7] to see the traffic for the people named Orlando.

Even if one doesn't weigh these equally for whatever reason, when the traffic for any individual named Orlando is double than the traffic for the city, let alone the long tail, something is off. --Joy (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joy: But those people named Orlando aren't known solely as "Orlando". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shhhnotsoloud yes, but that doesn't matter to all readers, some of whom expect to be able to navigate to them as such regardless of mononymous usage. I've previously found at least one case where their volume was significant even with a clear single primary topic by long-term significance, cf. Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation/Archive 56#on the quality of clickstream and pageviews usage data, so in this case, where there's many more kinds of options (note PamD's reply), I'd expect to see that as well. Worst case, we find this case is actually different and revert within a couple of months, but this time based on clearer data. --Joy (talk) 15:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. While "Orlando" is being known inside the US given its presence of Walt Disney World and Universal Orlando Resort, the name of "Orlando" remains unknown for readers outside the USA, at least for those who never travelled to the city. For them, the presence of tourism attraction doesn't mean that the city in Florida had long-term historical significance. 103.111.100.82 (talk) 14:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

post-move

WikiNav for Orlando for September showed 2k views (2013), and we could identify a total of 1.6k outgoing views (1569), while 677 remained filtered. 12 outgoing destinations are identifiable. The previously presumed primary redirect destination got 860 clickstreams. That would be ~43% of incoming and ~55% of outgoing in a base comparison. (That would assume that few of the filtered clickstreams went there; if the ratio is similar to these, then that'd be about +335, so ~59% of incoming and ~53% of outgoing.)

Monthly page views for most common outgoing topics show no major change in pattern for the destinations.

A decrease of incoming traffic to the base name is observable - this is an effect that we've seen elsewhere, too. Looks like search engines learn from our navigation change and modify how much traffic they send our way.

--Joy (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A look into the clickstream archive indicates this list of outgoing destinations is pretty stable, Orlando: A Biography has consistently been #2. The next group (#3-#5) is usually the given name, film and Frankish warrior. --Joy (talk) 00:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In October, we were at 2.5k views (2538), and could identify 2.1k outgoing clicks (2089), while ~35% (882) were filtered. With 1314 clickstreams to the city, that was ~51% of incoming and ~63% of identifiable outgoing, though possibly down to ~44% given anonymization uncertainty (and if the ratios were similar, that's more similar). --Joy (talk) 10:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]