Talk:Jones Act

Hiya Secret London. I think my stubbification of Jones Act hit at the same time as your deletion of the earlier nonsense. It now shows in the delete log and as a new page creation by me. No problem, except it now looks as if I created this rather thin article from scratch, which I did not. Oh well. That's life. Anjouli 18:08, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be Jones-Shafroth Act?

There is a much better known "Jones Act" that governs the rights of workers in navigable waters to obtain damages from their employers. Perhaps this should go to Jones-Shafroth, and a new page be made here, or this turned into a disambiguation page. -- Smerdis of Tlön 22:57, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

18 months later, but this has been completed. Newyorkbrad 13:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AGF revert of conversion into a redirect

I've reverted this edit, converting this disambiguation page into a redirect to one of the disambiguated items, leaving the other three disambiguated items out in the cold. Jones law is a common term here in the Philippines, referring to Jones Law (Philippines), a 1916 law concerning the governance of the Philippine Islands. I'm not sure whetherr re-doing the Jones Law redirect or leaving this one as a disambiguation page is a better solution for that case, but that leaves the question of the impact for people looking articles about for the other two terms disambiguated here. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jones Law and Jones Act are different enough terms. I'd be fine with Jones act going to Merchant Marine Act of 1920 and Jones law going to Jones Law (Philippines). In the interest of BRD, I'll make that change now and if disagreed we can revert and discuss some more, but I think those two terms are quite separate and search traffic shows Jones Act specifically is most often looking for Merchant Marine Act of 1920 based on subsequent feeds. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:06, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]