This is a foolish redirection. There's a place in the states called Amsterdam, but that would be just as foolish. --126.96.36.199 05:27, 27 March 2006 (EST)
I have to say I agree... Jpatokal 05:28, 27 March 2006 (EST)
I'll third the sentiment. If no one objects let's make this one another case of the "most famous" rule. -- Ryan 12:55, 27 March 2006 (EST)
I'll disagree. St. Petersburg, Florida is a big city and a big destination. It's not Paris (Arkansas). Searching for "St Petersburg" on Yahoo or Google gives the Florida city for all the first few results. St. Petersburg in Russia is simply not much, much more famous. --Evan 15:10, 27 March 2006 (EST)
I don't feel too strongly about this one, but it's worth noting that the St. Petersburg article on Wikipedia is about the Russian city, and from a traveler's standpoint I think that would definitely be the more famous destination. Agreed that the Florida city is a big place and that there are things for a tourist to do there, just not sure if anyone who hasn't been to Florida would ever have heard of it. But like I said, if anyone has a strong opinion that this should be disambiguated then this is enough of a corner case that I'd defer. -- Ryan 15:24, 27 March 2006 (EST)
@Evan; if you search on Санкт-Петербург in Google, it'll give you the russian cultural capital. I think its a bit ethnocentric to claim St. Petersburg (Florida) is as relevant. The most people who will roam Санкт-Петербург will do so in cyrillic. Also, quoting wikipedia on St. Petersburg, Florida, "it was named after Saint Petersburg, Russia, the birthplace of Peter Demens." But I don't know how to do redirects, so could someone please... --188.8.131.52 03:58, 7 April 2006 (EDT)
It is absolutely ethnocentric; this is the English-language Wikitravel, which is written in English, and we need to be responsive to the needs of English speakers and readers. On the Russian Wikitravel, I'd bet that Санкт-Петербург won't need a disambiguator. But that's not the subject under discussion.
Let's make sure that we're talking about the right thing here. We're not talking about whether the Russian city "deserves" the undecorated name, or is more important, or better, or more special or fantastic or precious. We're talking about whether a disambiguation string at the end of the article title is going to be a help or a hindrance. Since there is another notable city with the same name, it is a help, not a hindrance. --Evan 11:35, 11 April 2006 (EDT)
Just a note that we now have a "St. Petersburg (disambiguation)" page as the anonymous user above tried to "move" the article by creating a new disambiguation page and then copying the Russian article. If the Russian city is to be the "most famous" then the steps to take would be:
Delete the (copied) "St. Petersburg (disambiguation)" article.
Move "St. Petersburg" to "St. Petersbury (disambiguation)"
Delete "St. Petersburg" (which will be a redirect).
Move "St. Petersburg (Russia)" to "St. Petersburg".
This approach saves the history of all articles involved. Before doing this, however, we need a consensus that it's the right move. Evan, you indicated above that you're not OK with this. Any chance of a change of heart? -- Ryan 04:28, 7 April 2006 (EDT)
I have heard of the city in Florida, but would agree that for general travellers, the original one is much more famous than that one. As a minor point, I thought that in modern usage you ignored the fullstop (St rather than St.) -- DanielC 08:31, 11 April 2006 (EDT)
It depends on what kind of "general traveler". For a see-the-world traveler or typical European, ye olde Petrograd comes to mind, but for a sun-and-surf traveler or baseball fan in the U.S., the city on Tampa Bay would probably come first. Keep in mind that A) the City Formerly Known As Leningrad has only been "St. Petersburg" for 15 years (in most of our lifetimes), and B) we yanks are a self-absorbed lot who don't read the newspapers. :) - Todd VerBeek 09:12, 11 April 2006 (EDT)
I'm concerned that people keep referring to the "most famous rule", which doesn't exist. With disambiguation, it's not a which-is-more-famous question, it's a which-is-so-much-more-famous-that-it's-not-even-an-issue question. We disambiguate by default, and only leave off the disambiguator when some city is sufficiently more famous than all others such that disambiguating is a hindrance rather than a help. If I had to put a rough number on it, I'd say a place needed an order of magnitude more famosity over all other places with the same name combined for it to be reasonable to drop the disambiguator, and maybe two.
So, no, I still don't think we should drop the disambiguator for the Russian city, per the current dab rules. If someone thinks that the Russian city is sufficiently more famous to justify dropping the disambiguator, I'd like to see some evidence. If the rules are wrong, let's change those. --Evan 11:35, 11 April 2006 (EDT)
Well, what now? Evan is the only one disagreeing. As the Wikitravel:Consensus states, I should just plunge forward, and if Evan really doenst agree, he can undo it? I can't move pages, though, or at least, don't know how to.
Regarding the much more famous, I agree, its a matter of opinion, but I'm very sorry that I cannot agree with claiming the surf resort in California ;) is somewhere near as famous as SPB. In the example in Wikitravel:Article_naming_conventions#Disambiguation, besides Paris, also Los Angeles is being used, which is also a mid sized (~100.000 ) town. Saint Pete has 248,232, SPB has 4,6 and LA 3,8 million. SPB is 19 times as large as St. Pete.
Also Wikipedia uses its St. Petersburg page for the Russian 'mega polis', and offers direct disambiguation to the States' fellow.
Regarding the Englishness, I've encountered such arguments also on Wikipedia. Do you agree with , or follows Wikitravel another line? --184.108.40.206 04:37, 13 April 2006 (EDT)
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough: I disagree with you too. The city in the U.S. is famous among our audience as a travel destination. The question isn't "which has more people?" The question is whether one of them is so much, much more famous than the other that we can safely assume that almost anyone searching for just "St. Petersburg" on this site is interested in visiting Russia, not the Florida city on the gulf shore with a major league baseball stadium. You don't have to believe it, but it's true that Florida is a major destination and that in the minds of many English-speaking travelers, that's where "St. Petersburg" is found. This is not an encyclopedia; it's a travel guide. So, no: it doesn't have the same guidelines as Wikipedia. - Todd VerBeek 07:54, 13 April 2006 (EDT)
Wikipedia has had a long, long debate about this very same naming issue, and they came up with what, to me, looks like a pretty good compromise: "Saint Petersburg" is the Russian city, but the first-line disambig says "See also St. Petersburg, Florida or St. Petersburg (disambiguation)".
As an aside, I wouldn't object to a change in the rules. I think disambiguators are fundamentally evil and should be avoided unless necessary, whereas Evan's stance seems to be that they're the default state of affairs. I'll raise a separate discussion there. Jpatokal 06:55, 13 April 2006 (EDT)