I have been thinking about this, and I'm not 100% on the best way forward.

With my hierarchy suggestion, Homecoming (Story) would be renamed to Homecoming (Vol FB), while the quest would not need to be changed unless another new Quest appeared. Both pages would get a disambig icon.

As we identify more affected pages, I'll be looking at that and thinking about it some more so I can write an updated recommendation.

Last thing: I've updated the page-top disambiguation template. My template-fu isn't so great, so you have to put the page name in twice; but it allows you to put a descriptor instead of the page name instead.

{{DisambigIcon|Page Name|Page name or Descriptor}}

When I was updating the Mourning Phase winners I noticed an alliance called "Paying the Iron Price" but there is also a category with the same name which was linked to when I tried adding them to the winners list.

I tried adding a disambig page here but I'm not sure I went about it the right way. Where would alliances fall in the naming convention hierarchy? Also, after reading this thread, I am now aware of the Disambig Needed category and will use it in the future. :)

I think Alliance pages should get preferential treatment. The easier we make it for new users, the better. So Alliance names should always have preference for no "marker" on their page name.

Cool. Thank you, Ghost. :)

As much as we want to make it easier for new users, because they are the bread and butter of a wiki, I don't think they should get preference over everything else. The goal of this wiki has always been to "honor" the game and the books so I don't think there's any harm in encouraging people just to add the word "Alliance" to their page name. ;-)

The other advantage would be that if somebody searches Alliance, then that page would come up.

That's not going to work, because "Alliance" is such a common word that there are dozens of pages that appear in the search ahead of those that end with (Alliance). There is also an Alliance category for that exact purpose.

The flip side of that is that roughly 100% of alliance pages are being created second and already have to find a way around the fact that their Alliance name has already been taken for something else. So I'm advocating for a system that does not involve changing Alliance pages.

User:Orys Lothston has been doing a lot of work adding pages to the Category:Disambig Needed. I've been looking at the pages that have been identified and my initial suggestion will NOT work.

Almost 100% of the problem is with Quest names. If we start tagging Quest Pages with (Vol X) or (Bonus Quest), then we shouldn't - apart from a few cases - need to "tag" any other page type.

• (Vol I)
• (Vol II)
• (Vol III)
• (Vol You)
• (Vol IV)
• (Vol FB)
• (Vol V)

There are some rare cases where the two quests come from the same volume.

• Option: Quest Name (Storyline Name)
• Option: Quest Name (Vol X Ch X) and Quest Name (Vol X Part X)
• Option: Quest Name (Chapter X) and Quest Name (Part X)

Fascinating. With all the words in the English language, you'd think there wouldn't be so much duplication!  :-D

#DBsFault...