The Vault talk:Content organization guideline

Discrepancies between "Naming" and "Disambiguation"
The naming section lists priorities how to disambiguate, as follows: The disambiguation section lists them in another order: So "type" and "game" are interchanged, as well as "location" and "other". I think, the order should be more clear. Which one is valid? -- -- You like to talk to me? -- cCContributions -- 08:31, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Type
 * 2) Game
 * 3) Faction
 * 4) Location
 * 5) Vocation
 * 6) Combinations
 * 1) Game
 * 2) Type
 * 3) Location
 * 4) Other
 * I believe that "type" is subject, not game. So, "Smith (character)" or "Smith (note)" rather than "Smith (Fallout 2)". While locations are supposed to be when there are multiple Smiths in the same game while not in the same location.--Ant2242 (talk) 08:57, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understood this. But which one takes precedence? As for the recent example (and most disambigs I remember): I moved to Orders (Broken Steel), related to Orders (Fallout 4) – that's disambigued by game (disambiguation section). But it also could be Orders (holodisk) vs. Orders (paper note), disambigued by type, which is the first one in the naming section. -- UserCompleCCity Signature1.png -- You like to talk to me? -- cCContributions -- 09:09, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I believe that we've been doing it by game first. I'll move the type to underneath game now.--Ant2242 (talk) 10:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I think we should soften this somehow, putting intuition in the first place. The game-wise disambig makes sense in the given example, because both are some sort of notes. But if there's a character "Smith" in FO2 and a weapon "Smith" in FO3, then I would definitely disambig by type.

Or, what I will do now, creating redirects for the second reasonable possibility. But it should be fixed here anyway. -- -- You like to talk to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)