The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) feminist 01:06, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Colorado Museum of Natural History (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wrong use of DAB. It creates confusion because one article is about a municipal natural history and science museum in Denver, Colorado named the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, and the other article is about the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History which is a museum of natural history at a university in Boulder, Colorado. Neither of the aforementioned articles indicates any concern over readers being confused by the very different names. I also don't see any evidence where there was a name change. ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:00, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:05, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:05, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Numerous sources note that the Denver Museum of Nature and Science was previously the Denver Museum of Natural History, and before that its original name, for almost 50 years, was in fact Colorado Museum of Natural History, e.g. [1][2][3][4] etc. Indeed, it appears that the actual legal name of the Denver museum's organizational entity is still Colorado Museum of Natural History per [5][6]. Add to that the fact that when you Google this name, you get a consistent, relatively even mixture of Denver and Boulder results. Seems like there's a reasonable need for disambiguation. Having said that, perhaps some use of reciprocal headnotes, per WP:TWODABS, might suffice. --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the links, Arxiloxos, they actually provide the supporting documentation necessary to delete the dab, and I'll briefly explain why. The Denver Museum of Nature and Science has changed its name twice (every half-century), but it's still in the same location. It was the Colorado Museum of Natural History from 1900-1950 when the name was changed to the Denver Museum of Natural History, then in 2000 it became the Denver Museum of Nature & Science. The dab page is what confuses readers. When I first saw it (as an article instead of a dab), I thought maybe one wasn't a museum because of the way we use dab, but as I studied it a bit more, I realized the links were to two different museums. Why? 67 years have passed since the Denver museum was called the Colorado Museum of Natural History, which is still located in Denver where it has always been. On the other hand, the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History is located on the University of Colorado Boulder campus 35+ miles away - a different museum in a completely different city. I suppose we could create a dab for the museums in each state that have the Museum of Natural History in their names, or had a name change nearly a century ago. That's going to require a lot of dabbing. ^{Atsme📞📧} 02:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, unless it can be demonstrated that one of these entities is the primary topic of the term. If this leads to disambiguation pages for every state with a similar situation, so be it. bd2412 T 10:58, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• The article titles are not ambiguous, as would be a search for Mercury or Paris Treaty. The names won't cause editors to wikilink to the wrong article. A WP search for the University of Colorado Museum of Natural History takes you to the correct article, as it should. A search for the Denver Museum of Nature and Science takes you to the correct article, as it should. If I'm not mistaken, my interpretation of a dab page is that it should not be used as a TOC or list of names in a category such as Museums in Colorado. In this particular case, regardless of century old history that few even know, it's an unnecessary stop that creates confusion which defeats one of the 3 purposes of a dab, and that is to clarify ambiguous titles to help the reader "get to the information on that topic quickly and easily". ^{Atsme📞📧} 12:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The purpose of the dab page is to take you to the right place if you type "Colorado museum of natural history" in the search box. There is currently no museum with precisely that name. There are 2 pages someone might mean; the CU museum (whose name is pretty close), and the Denver museum (whose name used to be exactly the dab name, but that was a while ago). We don't know which one they want. I don't think you could call either one the primary topic, so you need to ask the reader which one they mean. I disagree this page confuses the reader; it's purpose, which I think it fulfills, is to avoid confusion from a reader landing on the wrong page. If someone can show one of these is the primary topic, this could be a redirect to that page with a hatnote to the other. Otherwise, keep as is. Atsme, do I understand right you think the CU museum is the primary topic? If so, why do you think that? --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:52, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  A couple of reasons, Floquenbeam beginning with the parenthetical "find sources" above that links to Colorado Museum of Natural History which brings up CU in the search, at is should. When you enter Colorado museum in the WP search bar, the dab comes up, and creates confusion over the names. If anything, when Colorado museum is entered in the search bar, the List of museums in Colorado should pop-up in the search not the dab that links to only two museums with entirely different names. Colorado Museum of Natural History should link to the CU and nothing else, and it may even be better served as a #redirect. The Denver Museum of Nature and Science doesn't need a dab or a redirect because when you enter Denver museum in the search, it's there. ^{Atsme📞📧} 13:49, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Wait; the very first item that comes up when clicking the "finding sources" link above is the ProPublica link to the Denver museum! And again, the only thing that has ever actually been called "Colorado Museum of Natural History" is the Denver museum; I can't see a justifcation for not linking to that somehow. And if there's no primary target, I think this dab page is the best solution. Anyway, wouldn't your concern be much better served by creating a redirect at Colorado museums to List of museums in Colorado so that shows up in the search box as a suggestion? Even without the issue you're reporting, that seems like a useful new redirect, so I've gone ahead and done that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, at least some progress was made. Floquenbeam, please see this diff as I sought a 2nd opinion before tagging for an AfD. I was looking to find the best solution without it being too much of a time sink considering the growing backlog in NPR which led me this article in the first place. It shouldn't be an article, and I didn't immediately see the need for a dab which is why I didn't add the template. The latter was added later by another editor which I subsequently removed in order to file this AfD. Perhaps the redirect suggestion by Sphilbrick would be the best option. If it turns out the dab stays, the dab template needs to be replaced, and the article marked as patrolled. ^{Atsme📞📧} 08:54, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.