Wikipedia talk:Hatnote#Appropriate Hat Note.3F

If a file metadata link goes to an unrelated article, should that article have a hatnote linking to the correct page? For example, :File:"Beware Ducks Crossing" sign 2025-05-08.jpg's camera model is listed as "A001" (the internal model name for the CMF Phone 2 Pro), which redirects to A-001 (an Apollo abort test). I imagine not, since it's not the most likely way to get to an article, but I'm not sure. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 21:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:I'd say that there should be a hatnote for the exact reason we have redirects from file metadata titles in the first place - to enable people to find out information about the make/model of the equipment used. It's not the most likely way to get to an article, but that just means it's unlikely to be the primary topic in the event of a clash, not that nobody uses it. Thryduulf (talk) 22:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi. The user @Gruesome Gary massively adds hatnotes on pages of places (mostly in Southeastern Europe) with the same name (see their recent contributions). I disagree with that. In my opinion, this is clearly in violation of WP:NOTAMB and I don't see a similar practice being followed by places in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, etc. I tried to discuss this topic with him, but was basically ignored. That's why I'm asking here if you think places with the same name should be linked like this, or is it against NOTAMB and should be stopped. Thank you for your opinion. FromCzech (talk) 12:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

:I believe that hatnote can be useful, for example, for places with the same name that are located close to each other and are referenced from one to the other, but the current practice of mass creation of links to the disambiguation page is imo against WP. FromCzech (talk) 12:50, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

::Hi @FromCzech, never meant to ignore you so apologies for that. Saw that was three years ago, so could not recall that earlier but will stop adding the hatnotes pending the outcome here. No bad intentions here from my side. Gruesome Gary (talk) 19:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

:WP:NAMB speaks for itself: "It is usually preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous". There's no reason to ignore this guideline in these cases. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:03, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

File:Symbol watching blue lashes high contrast.svg You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 June 28 § Template:Highway detail hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:52, 28 June 2025 (UTC)