I feel like there's a usability concern with some of the article names in the Fedora Project wiki. Here's a sample of some that have irked me:
These should be renamed to be more indicative of their content. "Fedora" should be included for project pages, and vague non-wiki-like titles such as "Overview" should be renamed.
- Websites -> Fedora Websites
- Women -> Fedora Women
- L10N -> Fedora Localization
- Overview -> Fedora Project (or perhaps simply Fedora)
Most pages should not include Fedora, since the Fedora wiki implies a bias towards Fedora-related information. For example, I expect a page on Red Hat contributions to contain contributions that Red Hat has made to Fedora.
I don't think this bias is strong enough for our project pages, or ones that are very vague. I'm not likely to assume that page called "Websites" is a project page since the name gives me no indication.
The repetition of "Fedora" and the capitalization in "Fedora Websites" in the URL gives me this indication. It reinforces the fact that the page is not just about "websites in Fedora" but rather about a proper noun called "Fedora Websites."
Redirects from "Fedora *" do not sufficiently solve the problem. The article's title will still be without "Fedora" and so will still evoke confusion. Tooltips shown by mousing over a link will also show the vague title. After all, redirects should redirect to a more specific or appropriate name, not a less appropriate one.
Ordinarily, I wouldn't think the repetition of "Fedora" is necessary. http://fedoraproject.org/docs reads much better than http://fedoraproject.org/fedora_docs. This is because I read it as "the docs page in the Fedora Project" and I am not confused. More importantly, I don't have any learned expectations about its content.
Wiki pages do have learned expectations. When given a URL to a wiki page, I learned that the content will be an article, and the last part of the URL is the article title. This is why URLs like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki do not strike me as redundant or confusing. On the other hand, I would be confused if http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview contained an overview of the Wikipedia.
Our wiki sadly violates these expectations. We name some articles using a "naive" convention, so the page's subject is ambiguous. This is a prime example of cognitive dissonance.