Talk:Orange County

Requested move 2006

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

requested move of Orange County (disambiguation) to Orange County

• support Tobias Conradi (Talk) 01:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• support ProveIt ^(talk) 02:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• support This makes perfect sense. That way no particular county can "hog" or "lay claim" to the name. Orange County, California is the most populous. Orange County, Florida is the #1 tourist destination in the world. Orange County, New York is home to Orange County Cycles – in the top-10 in internet searches.--Hokeman 03:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Kafziel 17:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Name change

My requested move of Orange County (disambiguation) to Orange County is complete, removing the tag today. -- ProveIt ^(talk) 16:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

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.

Actor Names for the movie

This was not a very popular movie with an easily confused title. They don't have to be linked but I think it IS necessary to specify which movie it is. -Mike Payne (T • C) 06:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Orange County redirect

I am aware that this issue was decided back in 2006, HOWEVER, I would like to bring up the possibility of having Orange County redirect to Orange County, California and create a disambiguation page for the others. The above arguments, are indeed valid, but the most famous Orange County is the one in California. It's not even close. When traveling around the United States or abroad, I say I am from Orange County and people immediately know where I am from, no one asks "which one?" Also, if Orange County is to be lumped together with all other counties of the same name, then we should do the same for the many different cities and locales that go by Los Angeles, San Francisco, London, or even California (there is a California, Pennsylvania). Thank you for your feedback. --CASportsFan (talk) 06:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

What metric can we use to determine that the California county is the common usage?   Will Beback  talk  07:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

There is no definite metric other than one's common sense: when one says Los Angeles almost everyone realizes that that person is talking about Los Angeles, California not Los Ángeles, Argentina, Los Angeles, Texas, or Los Ángeles, Nicaragua. The same goes for London, if you are talking about the Canadian city, people generally have to qualify it with "Ontario" or "Canada." The name Orange County has become synonymous with Orange County, California thanks to the various television shows and the film. --CASportsFan (talk) 07:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I have placed a move request on the Orange County, California talk page. To discuss, please go there so we can get a true consensus. --CASportsFan (talk) 07:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

But we're not moving that page, we'd be moving (or significantly editing) this page. Further, the watchers of the California page are more likely to favor that article. This page likely has a broader readership. Also, it's where the last discussion was held.   Will Beback  talk  08:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, sorry for the confusion. --CASportsFan (talk) 08:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I assume the proposal is really to make this page into a redirect, and move the existing contents to Orange County (disambiguation). I'm sympathetic to that, but I still think we need a more powerful argument than "common sense". While Google searches are useless for many conclusions, this is one area where Ghits can be persuasive. i note that many of the first 20 hits are for the California county, for example.   Will Beback  talk  08:23, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I know this is a few years old, but I also really think this should redirect to Orange County, California. None of the other places even have half to population of the California county, let alone its Wikipedia traffic.WikiHogan654 (talk) 09:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested Move 2011

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Dpmuk (talk) 13:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

---

Orange County → Orange County (disambiguation) — See Talk:Orange County, California. CASportsFan (talk) 08:02, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Strongly Support. I would hope I would support it because I initiated it! Haha. Also, when doing a Google search for "Orange County" all but two links were concerned with Orange County, CA (the other two were government sites for Orange County, FL and Orange County, NY): Link. Also, when doing an image search, there are very few images of the counties on New York, Florida, Virginia, and Texas and when doing a Google Maps search for "Orange County," the map automatically goes to Orange County, California: Link. --CASportsFan (talk) 08:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

• Keep disambiguation page. The rationale for Los Angeles occupying its spot (versus being at Los Angeles, California) is different than this- it's clearly more substantial than the other Los Angeleses, and this naming convention section gives more rationale. Orange County is different- there are Orange Counties that are within an order of magnitude of size and popularity to the California county. The naming of a TV show like Orange County Choppers shows that- it isn't "Orange County New York Choppers", after all. tedder (talk) 15:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

• Keep as a disambiguation page Although I am a southern Californian myself, I think it would be inappropriate to turn "Orange County" into a redirect to "Orange County, California" - as if it was the "real" or "only" Orange County. There are more than a million residents in Orange County, Florida, and it is a major tourist destination; it would be just as logical to redirect "Orange County" to Orange County, Florida as to Orange County, California. Orange County, New York is no slouch, and there are five other Orange Counties in the United States. Disambiguation is the appropriate treatment for this term. --MelanieN (talk) 15:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I think there should be a notice placed on the talk pages of all the other Orange County pages, to notify them of this discussion. Currently the only page which directs attention here is at Talk:Orange County, California which is likely to give a skewed result. --MelanieN (talk) 17:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I just put a notice of this discussion on those pages. It seems only fair. --MelanieN (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The reason Orange County, Florida is not as well known as Orange County, California, is the fact that people know that region of Florida by it's seat: Orlando, Florida. If one is going to Disney World, they fly to Orlando, if they are going to Disneyland, they fly into Orange County (or LAX, but that's beside the point). Although Orange County, California has larger or cities just as populous as Orlando, (Anaheim, Santa Ana, and Irvine), they are not known nationally like Orlando is and that is probably another reason why Orange County is usually synonymous with the California county. --CASportsFan (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't be so sure. Yes, you can fly into the Orange County (California) airport, but that's not it's name; it's been John Wayne Airport since 1979. And on the other hand, the second largest convention center in the country is Orange County Convention Center, located in... Florida. The two counties are really pretty much on a par as far as notablitity goes. And I say that as a Californian. --MelanieN (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

• Keep disambiguation page; the one in California probably is the most famous, but not enough more famous to be the primary topic. Powers ^T 01:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

• Keep disambiguation page The one in CA is not of enough national or international prominence. For example, most Texans outside of recent transplants will equate casual mention of "Orange County" with Orange County, Texas -- It's not like Paris vs Paris, Texas. I realize that this may boggle the minds of Californians, but really we aren't all thinking about you all the time. -Ben (talk) 10:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Aside from that not-so-subtle jab, if you look above you'll notice that Californians are generally opposed to the rename. tedder (talk) 12:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure -- meant all in fun, I assure you. A couple of more substantial points, though are that there exists a substantial population of the US who lives near one of the non-CA Orange Counties, for whom "Orange County" refers to the version in their own state. Another point is that (older?) people like myself who are unfamiliar with the recent "Orange County" media. -Ben (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose There's one in New York... hence Orange County Choppers, which is not the same as the Real Housewives of Orange County. 65.93.15.213 (talk) 04:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. I supported disambiguation back in 2006, and I don't see that anything has changed. Google is Google, Wikipedia is Wikipedia. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department: Please take a number} 07:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed move, redux

I see that there have been discussions before about whether Orange County should be moved to Orange County (disambiguation), and then redirected to Orange County, California. I hope this is not a touchy subject, but I had not seen the earlier discussions. The positions on the move all seem to be based on things like google searches (which are a helpful factor, see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but only one factor); and gut feels and "common sense," which aren't very persuasive.

I ran a few numbers, and I think they really call for the move; based on my review of these, it seems clear to me that all three quantitative measures I looked at point to the California county as the primary topic.

Orange County disambiguation analysis

Article	Erroneous links to Orange County disambiguation page that should link to the indicated article		Incoming links to article		Article traffic (January 2011)
name	count	percent	count	percent	count	percent
Orange County, California	19	86.2%	2682	45.3%	78261	73.1%
Orange County, Florida	0	0.0%	703	11.9%	7995	7.5%
Orange County, Indiana	0	0.0%	303	5.1%	1016	0.9%
Orange County, New York	2	9.1%	1019	17.2%	11541	10.8%
Orange County, North Carolina	0	0.0%	399	6.7%	3094	2.9%
Orange County, Texas	0	0.0%	133	2.2%	1383	1.3%
Orange County, Vermont	0	0.0%	278	4.7%	963	0.9%
Orange County, Virginia	1	4.5%	399	6.7%	2757	2.6%
Totals	22	100.0%	5916	100.0%	107010	100.0%

Erroneous links. At present (February 21, 2011), there are 22 articles that erroneously link to Orange County, where the editor who added the link apparently expected to link to a particular Orange County. In all but three of these instances (i.e. 86%), the desired target was the California county. There were 19 to the California county; 2 to the New York county; and 1 to the Virginia county; and none whatsoever to the other five counties. This shows that, in an overwhelming majority of the cases when an editor is including a reference to Orange County, he or she has the California county in mind. If the page were moved, readers of the article would be sent to the correct article when clicking on the link; readers of those 3 other articles would be sent to the wrong page, of course; but it would be topped with a hatnote indicating that "Orange County" redirects there, and there are other uses.

Incoming links. This is the first factor listed at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC: "Incoming wikilinks from Special:WhatLinksHere." At present (February 21, 2011), there are 5916 links to one or another of the Orange County articles. Almost half of them (45%) are to the article on the California county. The California county article has more links to it than the next four highest articles (New York, Florida, North Carolina, & Virginia) combined. this suggests to me, again, that the California county is the primary topic.

Article traffic. This is, I think, the best indicator of primary topic, as it shows directly what articles are being most accessed and most read. I checked traffic for January 2011, the most recent complete month, using the Wikipedia article traffic statistics tool. By this measure, a substantial majority (about 3/4) of page views of the articles were for the article on the California county; that is, the California article is accessed at a rate three times higher than all the other articles combined. This factor alone would make me conclude that the California county is the primary topic here; the other factors just make that even clearer.

It seems very obvious to me that, using objective quantitative measurements, Orange County, California is the primary topic here. All three measures I checked indicate that. I think numbers like this are a better mechanism than a feeling of what seems appropriate or seems to be "common sense". This is not a matter of Californians not appreciating or respecting other areas of the country. It's about having Wikipedia readers go promptly to the most appropriate article when searching for it, while still facilitating getting to similarly named articles in those fewer cases where the primary topic was not the desired one. TJRC (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

You make a strong case.   Will Beback  talk  23:22, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 20 June 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: No consensus — JFG ^talk 06:40, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

---

Orange County → Orange County (disambiguation) – @TJRC: makes some pretty sound analysis above--Prisencolin (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:59, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

• Support per nom and TJRC's data — Crumpled Fire • contribs • 01:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

• Support, for the reasons I laid out above. TJRC (talk) 03:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. Keep this a disambiguation page. California's Orange County probably is the most famous, but not enough more famous to be the primary topic. Orange County, Florida, alone has over 1 million inhabitants. Most of the statistics presented above have intra-wiki significance but only the article traffic stats relate directly to what readers want. Pageview stats for the past couple of months show California's OC to be a little more than twice as likely to be a reader's target. 70% is compelling but not quite enough for primary for me. —  AjaxSmack  04:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Really? Consistently more than double the traffic of all other topics combined is not quite enough to be primary? What multiple would convince you? TJRC (talk) 06:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
    • It's the second aspect of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC that I'm not convinced of. —  AjaxSmack  12:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I was responding to the comment "70% is compelling but not quite enough for primary for me." 70%, in a field of five, is pretty much a landslide. Heck, 70% in a field of 2 would be pretty much a landslide.

I think looking at your same graphed data as a pie chart, as here makes the point pretty clearly. The California county traffic dominates, occupying almost three-quarters of the chart. The California county's traffic averages 2,166/day, 4 times (actually closer to 5x) the traffic of the next-most frequent (the Florida county at 476/day) and six times the traffic of no. 3 (the New York county at 335/day).

The second aspect of PRIMARYTOPIC is on whether the notability and educational value is consistent over the long-term. "educational value" isn't very helpful here, and just devolves into the subjective gut feel and "common sense" approach that are better avoided. Editors all have different ideas of what is "common sense," and we're better served by looking at actual numbers. With respect to consistency over the long term, I think the fact that the traffic numbers I cited in the section above were in 2011, and the stats you provide for the last 3 months are pretty much the same five years later, is pretty much ample evidence that it's consistent over the long term.

[Edit: Turns out the change to pie chart is not reflected in the URL; to see the pie chart for the data, click the link, then click on "Change chart type" near the bottom of the page and select the "Pie" option.] TJRC (talk) 00:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

• Support per above. A WP:PRIMARYTOPIC has been established. SSTflyer 11:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
• Support per TJRC's data - It is PRIMARY topic. ✉cookiemonster✉ ^𝚨755𝛀 18:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
• Comment: The Orange County, California article should remain where it is. Per WP:USPLACE, articles on US counties and parishes are typically titled [[X County (or X Parish), State]]. Thus, this discussion should be whether the Orange County page should be coverted to a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, not a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC per se. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose. The pageviews are nice (although 70% is pretty eh), but I don't think this OC has displaced all the others in terms of significance. Florida's OC is still a major tourist attraction and is also quite populated. A few mislinks aimed at the California article does not convince me. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose, leave dab at base 2601:541:4305:C70:1ED:3A3D:1E96:77AE (talk) 16:34, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
• Support - Yes, Orange County, California may be more popular and can receive it's own Wikipedia page, but that does not mean it is the only Orange County out there. There should always be a disambiguation noted when multiple topics exist. I don't see a problem with this and I support the move. I think it will make things more clearer for readers who may not be familiar with either counties. Cheers, Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 11:36, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Huh? I think you've misunderstood, this move is to make Orange County a redirect to Orange County, California, not a disambiguation page (which it is already). Nohomersryan (talk) 13:20, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose Sorry, 70%ish percent isn't a slam dunk fulfillment of the "more likely than all other topics combined" criteria for a PRIMARYTOPIC in my book. Displacing the disambiguation page from the base title will only encourage mislinks. Our readers can find there way to the California county just fine with the current arrangement of titles (the CA county is the first Google result for "Orange County") Plantdrew (talk) 05:59, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
• Support. 70 percent of page views makes the California county the clear primary topic. Calidum ¤ 04:05, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose Florida OC has Orlando and 1,145,956 people. Also, note that prominent meanings such as Orange County Choppers do not refer to the California county. There isn't a primary topic here, sorry. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 04:30, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
  • The California OC has Anaheim (the original Disney theme park) and Santa Ana and a population of 3,010,232. Quite frankly, Orange County Choppers is the only OC, Florida branded thing out there, whereas we have Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County, Newport Harbor: The Real Orange County, The Real Housewives of Orange County, The O.C. and many others--Prisencolin (talk) 22:35, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
    • OC Choppers is in the New York OC, not Florida. Helps make a good point that even if the Florida OC didn't exist, the California one would still have trouble. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:56, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
• Support. 70% of page views meets the usage criterion of primary topic as more likely than all others combined. And I think from an international perspective, the California OC also meets the long-term significance criterion as it is the only one of them likely to be known by people outside the US. Jenks24 (talk) 11:13, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - given that the Florida county contains Orlando, Disney World, all that stuff, global tourism centre, I don't think we can say definitively that the California county is more notable, more commonly used or of greater long term significance. Dab page serves everyone best here.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose. The above pageview stats are actually miscounting things a bit, as they exclude three additional American counties and Orange County (film). With those included, the California county receives 61.8% of the page views,[1] which is a high but much less overwhelming proportion. Looking at the stats from 2011 cited by others above, it suggests that Orange County's share has declined. Given that all these topics have long-term historical significance, I don't believe readers would be served with this move.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

There's also the medieval County of Orange, covered in articles like Prince of Orange and Principality of Orange. This would also have serious long-term historical significance as the original holding of the dynasty that founded the Netherlands, provided a king of England and Scotland, and ultimately became the ancestors of all living European monarchs.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:55, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

• Comment By any count, whatever articles you wish to include or exclude as candidates, Orange County, California consistently gets more traffic than all other candidates combined. Not just any other candidate, not just the next-most-highest candidate, but all other candidates, combined. To those who think this is an insufficient proportion of page views, what threshold meets your requirements? Do you really need something like 90-98% to be convinced?

The commentary I see here seems to be that using Orange County, California as the primary topic is somehow denigrating to the others. That's not the case. It's only about getting readers of the encyclopedia to the article they are most likely trying to find, rather than having to click through disambiguation. When more than half of the readers don't get to the article they want, we're doing a disservice to the reader.

I have no connection with any Orange County being discussed here, but it seems pretty clear to me the California county is the one most sought by readers. So, in all seriousness, what threshold does it take? TJRC (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

TJRC, personally, I'm usually convinced when one topic consistently gets over 50% of the views (ie, more than all others combined) and has a reasonable claim to having the most long-term significance. However, there's some necessity of interpretation based on how wide or small the pageview gap is, and the significance of other ambiguous topics. In this case, Orange County, California gets at most 61.8% of the views, and it's probably substantially lower than that, as there's no surefire way to tell how many readers are hitting Principality of Orange, Prince of Orange, etc., looking for information on the County of Orange (those two articles got 17.8k and 37.4k views in the last 3 months, so it's probably a fair number[2]). I expect the real proportion of page views for the California county is between 50-60%, putting it within more questionable territory. This is especially so considering that the page view proportions seem to have declined since 2011, and the medieval polity and most if not all of the other American counties also have serious long-term significance.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

• • WP:PRIMARYTOPIC criteria is "much more likely". I'd say for me that begins at around 80%, and anything in the 90s is a slam dunk. I don't think the current percent for CA's OC is enough. Nohomersryan (talk) 22:07, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

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.

Arrangement

I don't see that it's helpful to readers to move 3 of the American counties above other topics, while placing the rest in an odd subsection for "other US counties". Clearly I'm not alone in this. I also don't see anyone typing in "County of Orange looking for anything but the medieval fiefdom; American counties (not to mention the other topics) simply aren't referred to in that way. Please discuss before making further changes.-Cúchullain ^t/c 02:43, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Well as determined by prior rms Orange County, California has just under the amount of notability to be on the stop of the page, not sure about the others. "County of Orange" is the official name of every county on this list, and the article title of the fiefdom isn't even "County of Orange", it's principality of Orange. Google books suggests it refers to various us counties as well.--Prisencolin (talk) 02:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

On the arrangement, this is cluttered and not very easy to navigate. That's my take, but will be interested to hear other opinions. Pinging Bkonrad, who challenged this before. On the redirect, I'll comment at the RfD.--Cúchullain ^t/c 02:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Cuchullain that this version is less cluttered. By fortuitous alphabetization, the California county is still listed first, and Florida, which is the next most populous county is listed second, so I don't see that the other arrangement offers any tangible advantage. older ≠ wiser 03:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

A few more notes. I don't understand the selection. Orange County, New York isn't terribly more populous or prominent than Orange County, North Carolina. It has less page views than Orange County (film).[3]. Orange County, Florida doesnt have terribly more page views than the film, either. The selection seems quite subjective, and I don't see any real navigation benefit.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:15, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but I think you're logic is overly dependent on page views as evidence, which is susceptible to certain problems.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:54, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, there's no value in separating out a subset of counties. Once you're on the disambiguartion page, the easiest way to find the one you're looking for is alphabetical. This is consistent with WP:MOSDAB, "entries should be ordered to best assist the reader in finding their intended article. Entries are typically ordered first by similarity to the ambiguous title, then alphabetically or chronologically as appropriate."

The California county should not be listed at the top. While I personally believe and have argued for it being the primary topic, that argument did not persuade in the RM discussion, so the status quo remains that there is no primary topic. Given that, the guidance "The primary topic, if there is one, should be placed at the top" does not apply here. TJRC (talk) 23:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Most people searching for Orange County are looking for Orange County, CA, this was something determined in the last few RMs.--Prisencolin (talk) 07:02, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

There are some cases where it makes sense to do this. Not here, though - it's not an unwieldly dab and the meanings are prominent anyway. Nohomersryan (talk) 04:44, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

This is where we just WP:IAR and use some WP:COMMONSENSE and just put it there anyways.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

The consensus (and, I'd argue, common sense) appears to be in favor of the previous solution. I'll restore it shortly.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:32, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

The California county is the most significant one, maybe not primary topic, and it doesn't help anyone that it isn't listed on top. Maybe we need an RfC.--Prisencolin (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

It's listed first in the current arrangement as well. We can have an RfC if you wish, but we've had several editors weigh in now already, and the consensus seems fairly clear.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:46, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't think you can say that for certain considering that RM was closed as a no concensus, and not a not moved.--Prisencolin (talk) 07:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Consider the following line at MOS:DABORDER "In cases where a small number of main topics are significantly more likely to be the reader's target, several of the most common meanings may be placed at the top, with other meanings below. See Mojave...--Prisencolin (talk) 07:02, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Request for comments: What should be listed at the top, if anything?

The consensus is against listing anything on top. Cunard (talk) 23:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

---

There are several counties known as "Orange County" which may be considered the most notable county with the name. In particular Orange County, California has been in the past been requested to become the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT of this page, but there has never been a clear concensus for that particular move. However, on this page it is not entirely clear which one or two other counties should be listed along with the California county. Amy more than three entries listed at the top of a disambiguation page is not recommended by WP:MOSDAB.Prisencolin (talk) 07:22, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

• There's no reason to elevate any particular entries. The California and Florida counties are already first in the alpha listing. The current version is just fine as is. older ≠ wiser 11:53, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
  • This isn't an advantage for anyone who has never even heard of any Orange County. In the current set up, they're not going to realize that the California and Florida counties, which are only coincidentally at the top, are actually the two most prominent meanings.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:31, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
    • If readers don't know they are looking for the county in either California or Florida, placing them above the fold is not going to help. older ≠ wiser 22:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose changing per Bkonrad and my and other comments above (pinging TJRC and Nohomersryan who also participated). For one, I don't see any need to pull Orange County, California out. It's the most prominent, but not by a wide margin - and as Bkonrad says, it's already listed first doing this alphabetically anyway. There's even reason to separate out any of the other topics. The two Prisencolin selected before aren't substantially more prominent than topics not selected. This is a case where if it ain't broke, don't fix it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:47, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose placing anything up top. I can see doing this if the two most prominent meanings would not be otherwise, but that is not the case here. Anyone searching OC is going to have the options placed right there in front of them anyway simply by virtue of how the page is set up, while this one seems like it'd be trying to cram a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC against consensus. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
• You all are making two contradictory arguments here:

1. Orange County, California is the most prominent meaning, but not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC
2. no other Orange County is a clear secondary topic, so we can't have anything at all listed at the top.

• Doesn't this just suggest that OC, California is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC then, if there is no clear secondary or tertiary topic? Of course this is a discussion for another time, but just something to consider.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I would say OCC is more prominent than any individual topic of the name, but not more than all topics combined, which would be the condition of PRIMARYTOPIC. I don't see the benefit of separating it out when it's already first in the current arrangement. Anyone coming here looking for OCC will find it easily, we don't need to reinvent the wheel.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. Repeating my comments under "Arrangement" for convenience. I referred to the California county there, but it applies equally to the Florida one.

In my opinion, there's no value in separating out a subset of counties. Once you're on the disambiguartion page, the easiest way to find the one you're looking for is alphabetical. This is consistent with WP:MOSDAB, "entries should be ordered to best assist the reader in finding their intended article. Entries are typically ordered first by similarity to the ambiguous title, then alphabetically or chronologically as appropriate."

The California county should not be listed at the top. While I personally believe and have argued for it being the primary topic, that argument did not persuade in the RM discussion, so the status quo remains that there is no primary topic. Given that, the guidance "The primary topic, if there is one, should be placed at the top" does not apply here.

TJRC (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Are there one or two other counties you think that are also very prominent?--Prisencolin (talk) 00:47, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

It's an irrelevant question. In the absence of a primary topic, there is no reason to set out any entry or entries separate from the first. You seem to be suggesting that first, the two counties are co-primary topics, and second where there are multiple co-primary topics, those topics should be separately listed. I don't agree with that, and I see no basis in the existing guidelines for it. I would also resist any edits to the guidelines to suggest it. The purpose of a DAB page is to allow a reader to quickly locate the desired article, and having to look through two lists rather than one is not helpful. TJRC (talk) 15:11, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Isn't there a line in WP:MOSDAB that says you can do this. I'm having trouble finding it now for some reason.--Prisencolin (talk) 19:02, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Under WP:DABORDER it says "In cases where a small number of main topics are significantly more likely to be the reader's target, several of the most common meanings may be placed at the top, with other meanings below." In this case, the most likely article to be sought is already first, and the 2nd most likely is already 2nd. And other than OC California, none of them really stand out as substantially more likely than the others to be the topic sought by readers.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:14, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

And in the examples such as Mojave amd Mercury, the most common meanings are disparate types such that a common grouping is unlikely. That's not the case here. Some other examples are Lincoln and Washington. older ≠ wiser 19:29, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose  I think that most readers who want OCC will know that the county is in California, and will find the alphabetic list of states that is there now a convenience.  To help readers identify the prominence of the various Orange Counties, how about adding the populations of each of the counties?  Unscintillating (talk) 22:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

I was curious to see the populations in a table.

County	Population
CA	3,010,232 in 2010
FL	1,145,956 in 2010
IN	19,840 in 2010
NY	372,813 in 2010
NC	133,801 in 2010
TX	81,837 in 2010
VT	28,936 in 2010
VA	33,481 in 2010

Unscintillating (talk) 12:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Not really appropriate content for a disambiguation page. bd2412 T 15:04, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I don't think we need anything else.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:28, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose For multiple reasons all of which are already mentioned above, it ain't broken so don't fix it. (Orange County, Florida resident, in response to RfC) --John, AF4JM (talk) 14:39, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose As per all previous reasons stated. There is no need to fix something that isn't broken. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 21:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

---

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.