→Flag icons: change initial link in Delusion23's comment to a timestamped entry, to make the discussion clearer |
|||
Line 138: | Line 138: | ||
== Flag icons == |
== Flag icons == |
||
Is [ |
Is [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=San_Javier&oldid=559889710 this] an appropriate use of flag icons? Cheers. [[User:Delusion23|<font color="green">'''Del</font><big><sub><font color="black">♉</font></sub></big><font color="green">sion'''</font><font color="black">'''23'''</font>]] [[User talk:Delusion23|<font color="green">(talk)</font>]] 17:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
:No, [[WP:MOSDAB#Images and templates]] seems pretty clear: ''Icons, including flag icons, should not be used on disambiguation pages. Only if flag topics are being disambiguated and images are needed to do so, then flag icons or flag images might be added.'' In this page, the flags are not for the ambiguously named places, but for the countries in which the places are located. [[User:Bkonrad|older]] ≠ [[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 17:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
:No, [[WP:MOSDAB#Images and templates]] seems pretty clear: ''Icons, including flag icons, should not be used on disambiguation pages. Only if flag topics are being disambiguated and images are needed to do so, then flag icons or flag images might be added.'' In this page, the flags are not for the ambiguously named places, but for the countries in which the places are located. [[User:Bkonrad|older]] ≠ [[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] 17:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
::I've changed the link in Delusion23's comment, to a diff-perma-link prior to Bkonrad's fixes (for which thanks :) to make the discussion clearer. –[[User:Quiddity|Quiddity]] ([[User talk:Quiddity|talk]]) 18:59, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:59, 1 August 2013
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
- Updates of Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Adopting disambiguation pages seem to be flagging. • Ling.Nut
Pygmalion issues help wanted
I am not sure if this is outside the scope of this project. I have been attempting to refine improper linking to Pygmalion (play) and Pygmalion (mythology), and I could use some assistance cleaning up {{Pygmalion}}, {{Pygmalion navbox}}, and {{My Fair Lady}} (the latter two which I have recently created). I have posted some particular issues at Talk:Pygmalion (play)#Template:Pygmalion. Please feel free to jump in and edit the templates or leave comments there.— Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 23:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Extension:Disambiguator
mw:Extension:Disambiguator will be enabled with 1.22wmf8 on June 27. This adds the __DISAMBIG__ magic word. -- Gadget850 talk 10:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- I'm currently updating WPCleaner so that it can use this new extension. The release taking this magic word into account will be 1.28 and will probably be released during the coming week. WPCleaner will make less API calls when analyzing a page (faster page loading), because it's easier to retrieve the information of a page being a disambiguation page or not with the "disambiguation" property being set by Disambiguator. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 21:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- The Disambiguator extension is already enabled; see Special:Version. -- Gadget850 talk 22:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I know, but tools dealing with disambiguation links need to be updated to take advantage of it ;-) I'm just saying I'm updating my tool for that. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- WPCleaner 1.28 has been released, now using the "disambiguation" property. Loading pages for full analysis is now faster, thanks to the property to be able to do less API requests. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 18:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I know, but tools dealing with disambiguation links need to be updated to take advantage of it ;-) I'm just saying I'm updating my tool for that. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- The Disambiguator extension is already enabled; see Special:Version. -- Gadget850 talk 22:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- I'm currently updating WPCleaner so that it can use this new extension. The release taking this magic word into account will be 1.28 and will probably be released during the coming week. WPCleaner will make less API calls when analyzing a page (faster page loading), because it's easier to retrieve the information of a page being a disambiguation page or not with the "disambiguation" property being set by Disambiguator. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 21:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Artificial
The page Artificial bears the {{disambiguation}} template, but it is not really a DAB page. It is a list of artificial things (artificial beaches, artificial food, artificial knees, etc.) none of which, as far as I know, are called "artificial" without the following noun. The same thing goes for Synthetic, and while Man-made seems to include at least a few items genuinely in need of disambiguation, it also includes some partial name matches. On the other hand, it seems that editors do link to these pages, so some article on the concept is probably called for. Cnilep (talk) 07:46, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- I removed the dab template. -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:41, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- I would take this a step further and move Artificial to the noun form, Artificiality (which currently redirects to Artificial), and add a short lede noting that Artificiality is the state of things being the product of human invention or manufacture, rather than occurring as a product of nature, and is often used for things that are made to appear or function like their natural counterparts (artificial sweeteners, artificial organs, etc.). I'm sure a source could be found for this proposition. bd2412 T 03:23, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Foxy Brown
For some strange, unknown reason, the film Foxy Brown is not located at the primary topic but at Foxy Brown (film) and the term "Foxy Brown" is instead a disambiguation page. Since all references to the term "Foxy Brown" derive from the name of the film, the film should be obviously moved the primary term "Foxy Brown" and the current dab page moved to "Foxy Brown (disambiguation)". Could someone help fix this error? Viriditas (talk) 11:17, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Being the source of derived names does not automatically make a topic primary, so there is no "error". WP:RM at Talk:Foxy Brown or Talk:Foxy Brown (film) (with notification on the other) can see if there's consensus to change from one state (no primary topic) to another (the film as primary). -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:24, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- There is very clearly an error. The film "Foxy Brown" is and always has been the primary topic per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and all other uses are derivative of this topic. Why a disambiguation page was created and the primary topic was disambiguated remains unknown. It looks like someone tried to promote the rapper named Foxy Brown (rapper) (named after the film) and spammed the {{Def Jam Recordings}} template across the encyclopedia to pump up the incoming links, which is entirely meaningless when one takes into account that the film represents the primary usage of the term with long-term significance in English reliable sources. Why does an obvious fact like this need to be discussed? Viriditas (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- If it is so obvious, then there should be mo problem putting together some evidence supporting that claim and allow a RM to determine consensus. FWIW, from the edit history, it appears that the page at Foxy Brown was originally about the rapper, which was moved in 2008 and changed into a disambiguation page. Without evidence, I see no reason to presume that the film is the primary topic. older ≠ wiser 11:53, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Based on page traffic, there is no contest -- the rapper should be the primary topic by that criteria (39597 vs. 7952 over last 30 days). But a look at Google books shows a more even balance between the film and the rapper, so on the evidence for the long-term significance is a draw or perhaps slightly in favor of the film. With such overwhelming difference in traffic stats compared with weak evidence for long-term significance, having a disambiguation page at the base name may be the best you can hope for. If you propose a move, you might find a boomerang effect with editors wanting to move the rapper back to the undisambiguated name. older ≠ wiser 12:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Weak evidence for long-term significance about the film? That's just crazy. To quote film critic Katrina Hill, "Foxy Brown is one of the most culturally significant blaxploitation films ever made, with a legacy that extends far beyond the film itself..." Both of the singers named in the dab use stage names taken from the film's character "Foxy Brown", because the film is so significant. The film itself has been around for 39 years, far longer than each of these singers careers (19 years for the rapper and 24 years for the Jamaican singer). I can't believe we are actually still discussing this. There's no "balance" here at all nor any "weak" evidence. You're going to need to learn to discriminate between marketing, A&R, advertisements, and actual, reliable and scholarly sources about the term, which far, far outnumber anything about the rapper or the singer. I'm not worried about any boomerang, I'm worried about the decline of civilization evidenced by this "discussion". Viriditas (talk) 12:27, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- A ridiculous conclusion from this "evidence". To paraphrase, "A pop culture topic I understand the significance of is obviously more important than pop culture topics I don't, and if everyone doesn't take my word for it, then our society is doomed." All three topics have long-term significance (over a decade, less than a century). -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- A demonstrably false statement. Please demonstrate the long-term significance of the Jamaican singer and the rapper with reliable sources. As I've already shown the film is considered culturally significant, and the legacy of the character "Foxy Brown" from that film led directly to two female singers taking her name. The sources do not indicate any "long-term significance" in regards to the rapper or the Jamaican singer. In fact, I could not find any reliable sources about the Jamaican singer at all. So we are left with two topics, not three, and no need for a dab page. Viriditas (talk) 21:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- A ridiculous conclusion from this "evidence". To paraphrase, "A pop culture topic I understand the significance of is obviously more important than pop culture topics I don't, and if everyone doesn't take my word for it, then our society is doomed." All three topics have long-term significance (over a decade, less than a century). -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Weak evidence for long-term significance about the film? That's just crazy. To quote film critic Katrina Hill, "Foxy Brown is one of the most culturally significant blaxploitation films ever made, with a legacy that extends far beyond the film itself..." Both of the singers named in the dab use stage names taken from the film's character "Foxy Brown", because the film is so significant. The film itself has been around for 39 years, far longer than each of these singers careers (19 years for the rapper and 24 years for the Jamaican singer). I can't believe we are actually still discussing this. There's no "balance" here at all nor any "weak" evidence. You're going to need to learn to discriminate between marketing, A&R, advertisements, and actual, reliable and scholarly sources about the term, which far, far outnumber anything about the rapper or the singer. I'm not worried about any boomerang, I'm worried about the decline of civilization evidenced by this "discussion". Viriditas (talk) 12:27, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- There is very clearly not an error in the arrangement of articles. There is clearly an error in your reading of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, in which "derivative", "derived", etc., do not appear. "Primary" as in "primary topic on Wikipedia" does not mean "first" or "that from which all others are derived". I do not know what an obvious fact like that needs to be discussed. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't read it that way, and I'm quite familiar with PRIMARYTOPIC as I already explained. The primary usage of the term "Foxy Brown" with long-term significance in English reliable sources refers primarily to the film and the character who appears in that film of the same name. Viriditas (talk) 21:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- There is very clearly an error. The film "Foxy Brown" is and always has been the primary topic per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and all other uses are derivative of this topic. Why a disambiguation page was created and the primary topic was disambiguated remains unknown. It looks like someone tried to promote the rapper named Foxy Brown (rapper) (named after the film) and spammed the {{Def Jam Recordings}} template across the encyclopedia to pump up the incoming links, which is entirely meaningless when one takes into account that the film represents the primary usage of the term with long-term significance in English reliable sources. Why does an obvious fact like this need to be discussed? Viriditas (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see a clear primary topic here. The argument could be made that a Platinum-selling #1 recording artist is a strong candidate for primary topic. I'd support the status quo. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Make that argument using reliable sources about her long-term significance. Clearly, the sources indicate the long-term significance of the film "Foxy Brown" in greater numbers and with more authority. Virtually every major source refers to the film's ""enduring iconic status" and explains the reasoning behind the film's long-term significance with multiple examples and lines of evidence. You cannot even begin to make the same argument about the rapper, let alone the singer. This is a closed case. Even academic sources like Gwendolyn D. Pough at Syracuse University acknowledge the long-term significance of the film and how young women like the rapper and singer are attempting to reclaim Grier's character of Foxy Brown as their own. (Pough 2004, p. 68) Viriditas (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
TV18 at Redirects for discussion
Contributors to this project may be interested in a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 June 16#TV18. TV18 Currently redirects to the DAB page Channel 18, which includes TV18 (India) and two categories for television stations on channel 18 (one in Canada and another in the USA). Cnilep (talk) 03:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Chinese surnames (again)
After a long discussion regarding the usage of Chinese characters in article titles, the decision regarding correct disambiguators to use for Chinese surnames still goes on. It would be useful to have lots of eyes on this, so hopefully the project has something to contribute here. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
- And it is along again, at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Inadequacy of current WP:UE guideline with regard to Chinese names -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Requesting that Hollywood redirect to Hollywood (disambiguation) and that the present Hollywood page be renamed Hollywood, Los Angeles. The reason is that scores of articles using the word "Hollywood" end up on the page devoted to the neighborhood in Los Angeles, rather than the page devoted to Cinema of the United States. Please discuss at Talk:Hollywood#Requested_move. GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:26, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
DNS primary topic
More opinions about the creation of a primary topic for DNS are welcome - see Talk:DNS, and Wikipedia:Requested_moves#July_14.2C_2013. Widefox; talk 09:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
6D
redirect to "Sixpence"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.99.229 (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
- In England d used to be the abbreviation for a penny, hence 6d = sixpence and somebody added 6D. It's not entirely without logic. SchreiberBike talk 02:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Edit "warring" on Kaleidoscope Dream
There have been a couple of disambiguating edits on Kaleidoscope Dream (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) which have been reverted, on the basis of overlinking, which is fair enough. But it continues to come up on toolserver as a page that needs disambiguating. Is this because of a bug? If I try the "unlink" function on dab solver it takes the word away completely. StAnselm (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Question regarding Oppenheimer page
Asked and answered |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
A question has come up regarding the Oppenheimer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) page.
So any responses in to the following to gain consensus would be appreciated. MarnetteD | Talk 17:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Page move to Oppenheimer (surname)
Project tag on the talk page
CommentThanks for your posts Bkonrad. Examples of my reference points are Lovejoy (surname) and Lovejoy (disambiguation) both of which still have the project tag on them and Smith (surname) and List of people with surname Smith neither of which have a DAB project tag. Thus my confusion. If everything is as it should be than please feel free to collapse this whole thread as "asked an answered" with my thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 17:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
|
Primary topic
Similar to #DNS primary topic, more opinions are sought on the primary topics at Talk:TCP and Talk:TLS.
For acronyms, would it be useful if WP:PRIMARYTOPIC mentioned how it is contrasts with WP:ACRONYMTITLE which some editors are explicitly conflating, others seemingly conflating in the discussion? Widefox; talk 08:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- How does it contrast with WP:ACRONYMTITLE? That is, what would we change or add in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:39, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- Clarify...WP:ACRONYMTITLE talks about "To determine the prominence of the abbreviation over the full name, " and to check abbreviations.com. My hunch is the awareness of those may be distorting the PRIMARYTOPIC debate which should be focussed on likelihood and longevity. As to what to add, maybe something along the lines of "In contrast to WP:ACRONYMTITLE, the selection of an acronym as a primary topic is unrelated to usage of the full title versus the acronym, and solely about in comparison with the other ambiguous terms." That is one thing I'm thinking, but it may need some work so rather than contrast, maybe unite would be better, a suggestion. Widefox; talk 12:50, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- I like that. In general, not just with acronyms, the article titling guidelines are about "Here's a topic. What title should it have?" While disambiguation asks "Here's a title. What topic should it have?" A topic article always has to have a title, but a title doesn't always have to have a (primary) topic. It doesn't matter if the Title1's topic should be titled "Title2" -- that just means we redirect Title1 to Title2. If Topic1's title should have Topic2 (the primary topic for the title is Topic2), then Topic1 needs a qualifier appeneded to the title. -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- Clarify...WP:ACRONYMTITLE talks about "To determine the prominence of the abbreviation over the full name, " and to check abbreviations.com. My hunch is the awareness of those may be distorting the PRIMARYTOPIC debate which should be focussed on likelihood and longevity. As to what to add, maybe something along the lines of "In contrast to WP:ACRONYMTITLE, the selection of an acronym as a primary topic is unrelated to usage of the full title versus the acronym, and solely about in comparison with the other ambiguous terms." That is one thing I'm thinking, but it may need some work so rather than contrast, maybe unite would be better, a suggestion. Widefox; talk 12:50, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
To unify discussion with Dicklyon's proposed WP:NOTFORNERDS change to PRIMARYTOPIC [1], moved to Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Primary topics - acronyms Widefox; talk 13:25, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of TV18
I have proposed deletion of Channel 18 using PROD. The disambiguation page points to one article in main namespace (TV18), and links to two categories via a template. Earlier, I added a hatnote to TV18 pointing to those two categories. Cnilep (talk) 02:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- I just redirected it. Deletion isn't necessary in this case, and the name is a likely alternate for TV18. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:36, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Television channel lists
On a subject related to discussion of Channel 18 above, what's the deal with, for example Channel 15, Channel 17, Channel 19 and the like? These pages do not point to any articles in the main name space; they each contain {{NA Broadcast List}}, a template that points to categories with the relevant number (Channel 15 in Canada, Channel 15 in Mexico, etc.). I guess its an attempt to be consistent with pages such as Channel 2, which points to legitimately ambiguous articles such as Channel 2 (Iran) and Channel 2 (Israel) and includes the category pointers in a 'See also' section. They're not exactly disambiguation pages, though, are they? Cnilep (talk) 01:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
the place for tourist destination:Nepal
Geographically and culturally,Nepal is a country of diversity.It has geographical variations. It expands from the top Himalayas to the low valleys of Terai.It has also diversity of language,culture and ethnic communities.From the point of religionn, people believe in differnt religions.Similarly,the different traditions,and customs and rituals have also made Nepal ,multicultural.In this diversity lies the potential of tourism. When we see the tourism of the world,we find some remarkable places. In some places,we find good lakes.And,in other places,we find good wildlife that attracts tourists.But Nepal is such a country where we find a number of natural resources like natural resources like forests,mountains,lakes etc.So it has been ideal places for tourists.From geographical point of view,nepal is diverse.we have high ranging himalayas like mount everest.We have several other ranges.All these ranges are open to all the people to visit.So.Nepal is a very good place for mountaineering among the places in the world.There are several other destinations of trekking for the people.The wildlife and national parks are other centres for tourists.there are a number of wildlife parks for the people.We have rare species of animals of the world.Tourists can find many kinds of flora and fauna.Nepal is also a god-sporting country for it"s water adventure.Rafting,boating and river surfing are some of the major sources of water adventure.But the most exciting adventure for the tourists will be rafting. Ethnic and cultural diversities may be good source of entertainment.Nepalese people have a number of castes and ethnic groups,even thought there is feeling of UNITY IN DIVERSITY among the people.All these prove to be fascinating for tourists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shubhang Giri (talk • contribs) 12:46, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Flag icons
Is this an appropriate use of flag icons? Cheers. Del♉sion23 (talk) 17:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- No, WP:MOSDAB#Images and templates seems pretty clear: Icons, including flag icons, should not be used on disambiguation pages. Only if flag topics are being disambiguated and images are needed to do so, then flag icons or flag images might be added. In this page, the flags are not for the ambiguously named places, but for the countries in which the places are located. older ≠ wiser 17:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)