2009/8/19 Carcharoth :
> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton
> When I go to look something up on plankton (a core encyclopedic
> article if ever there was one), do I really want to have to read:
> "For the SpongeBob character, see List of chara
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:24 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/19 Carcharoth :
>
>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton
>> When I go to look something up on plankton (a core encyclopedic
>> article if ever there was one), do I really want to hav
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:24 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>> 2009/8/19 Carcharoth :
>>
>>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton
>>> When I go to look something up on plankton (a core encyclopedic
Carcharoth wrote:
>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton
>>
>> When I go to look something up on plankton (a core encyclopedic
>> article if ever there was one), do I really want to have to read:
>>
>> "For the SpongeBob character, see List
2009/8/19 Phil Nash :
>>> "For the SpongeBob character, see List of characters in SpongeBob
>>> SquarePants#Plankton"?
>
> It can get worse than that! I encountered, on [[Pol Pot]], {{seealso|Paul
> Potts}}, and vice versa. The IP addresses resolved to [[CERN]] of all
> places.
I still hold the b
Phil Nash wrote:
> Carcharoth wrote:
>
>>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton
>>>
>>> When I go to look something up on plankton (a core encyclopedic
>>> article if ever there was one), do I really want to have to read:
>>>
>>> "For th
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:24 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> This is almost a FAQ on this list :-) The usual cure is a two-item
> disambig page. For an example, see what I just did to [[Plankton]].
I remember bringing this up once yarns ago, and eventually getting
lots and lots of resistance to the idea
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> It boggles the mind to imagine what Pol Pot would have done
>with a nuclear facility; he could have outdone his relative, Stew Pot.
Ah. Cambodian genocide jokes. Just before lunchtime, too.
-Stevertigo
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
2009/8/19 stevertigo :
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>> It boggles the mind to imagine what Pol Pot would have done
>>with a nuclear facility; he could have outdone his relative, Stew Pot.
> Ah. Cambodian genocide jokes. Just before lunchtime, too.
Q. Why did the chicken cross the road?
A. HITLER!!
David Gerard wrote:
> Q. Why did the chicken cross the road?
> A. HITLER!!
Not accurate. It was actually the eugenics policies of the factory on
the east side of the strasse that motivated the crossing. Goebbels
Gobbles had better benefits too.
-Steven
__
This is how I do it. If in "Plankton" we have only one other thing named
planton, then we shouldn't have a disamg page just for two items. That seems
overkill. So in that case SB_Plankton makes sense. If however in "Bob
Jones" we have 15 people, 3 things, and 2 places named "Bob Jones" then
wrote:
> This is how I do it. If in "Plankton" we have only one other thing
> named planton, then we shouldn't have a disamg page just for
> two items. That seems overkill. So in that case SB_Plankton
> makes sense.
Repeat: "And four years isn't too long I suppose for
those people to finally g
So you repeat what I say and then say you're not repeating what I said, and
then repeat it
There's an issue here that you're arguing against your very own position.
I'm not sure you are understanding what I said.
W.J.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
Wiki
wjhon...@aol.com> wrote:
> So you repeat what I say and then say you're not repeating what I said, and
> then repeat it
> There's an issue here that you're arguing against your very own position.
> I'm not sure you are understanding what I said.
Um. Nice try.
-Stevertigo
Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambiguations can
be unencyclopedic and give the wrong impression, and if so, is having
a neutral dab hatlink better than a jarring note being sounded at the
top of a page, the first thing the reader will read after the title?
OK, that was a long
Actually this looks like the perfect subject for a blog post. The
Beirut/beer pong diff is a classic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beirut&oldid=21810147
Got more like that? I'd be glad to blog it, or possibly grant editor ops at
the WikiVoices blog (a group blog).
Thanks very much
I have no idea what you just ask. That's a lot of jargon for one
question.
-Original Message-
From: Carcharoth
To: English Wikipedia
Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 1:06 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes
Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambigua
m: Carcharoth
> To: English Wikipedia
> Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 1:06 pm
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambiguations can
> be unencyclopedic and give the wrong impression
;
> -Original Message-
> From: Carcharoth
> To: English Wikipedia
> Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 1:06 pm
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambiguations can
> be un
article, thus not have a
> disamg page to list two items.
>
> Will Johnson
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Carcharoth
> To: English Wikipedia
> Sent: Thu, Aug 20, 2009 2:35 am
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes
>
> OK. I'll break it down:
&
2009/8/20 Carcharoth :
> That is why I am saying that it is best to have a neutral form for hatnotes:
> "For other things with this name, see (disambiguation)".
> Or whatever the standard wording is.
{{otheruses}} and its variants.
> Anyway, in most cases of "two item disambiguation pages
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:34 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/20 Carcharoth :
>
>> That is why I am saying that it is best to have a neutral form for hatnotes:
>> "For other things with this name, see (disambiguation)".
>> Or whatever the standard wording is.
>
> {{otheruses}} and its variant
I got what you were saying before evidently. I don't have a two item rule,
and I don't think we should have a two-item rule :)
In general I don't really like rule creep. I enjoy seeing people
slugging it out and getting outraged, because I'm evil like that. Than I can
pretend false sympath
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:05 PM, wrote:
> I don't however see the
> whole mountainish molehill if there is only one link at the top.
>
> Will Johnson
>From what I'm understanding and agree with, the molehill is not the issue
over disambig pages. The initial issue is that someone looking up pl
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:05 PM, wrote:
>
>> I don't however see the
>> whole mountainish molehill if there is only one link at the top.
>
> From what I'm understanding and agree with, the molehill is not the issue
> over disambig pages. The
Keegan Paul wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:05 PM, wrote:
>> I don't however see the
>> whole mountainish molehill if there is only one link at the top.
> From what I'm understanding and agree with, the molehill is not the issue
> over disambig pages. The initial issue is that someone lookin
We do already have on this guideline wording on this, for anyone wondering:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Disambiguation_pages
"If there are three or more topics associated with the same term, then
a disambiguation page should normally be created for that term (in
which case
quiddity wrote:
> We do already have on this guideline wording on this, for anyone wondering:
> "If there are three or more topics associated with the same term, then
[argument (against trivial disambiguations)] = strong
[counterargument] = doesn't work
alternative tactic = [point to policy]
(wh
quiddity wrote:
> Therefor, in my opinion, and according to my limited-understanding of
> the disambig guidelines, there doesn't need to be a [[plankton
> (disambiguation)]] page at all, and the [[plankton]] article doesn't
> need a hatnote at all.
Hm. I don't agree. We need to at least point peo
Some disambiguation pages have "see also" sections for things that
aren't strictly disambiguation. But yes, it can be difficult to draw
the line between classic disambiguation and a topic overview of
loosely related terms, annotated in a way that is more informative
than search results would be (at
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
> Some disambiguation pages have "see also" sections for things that
> aren't strictly disambiguation. But yes, it can be difficult to draw
> the line between classic disambiguation and a topic overview of
> loosely related terms, annotated in a w
On 8/19/09, Carcharoth wrote:
> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
I don't see the problem here. Be bold and remove crap, whether
pointless hatnotes or anything else.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe
2009/8/21 Tony Sidaway :
> On 8/19/09, Carcharoth wrote:
>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
> I don't see the problem here. Be bold and remove crap, whether
> pointless hatnotes or anything else.
It's an editorial issue. The two-item disambig is one workaround,
though more t
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 3:40 AM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> On 8/19/09, Carcharoth wrote:
>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>
> I don't see the problem here. Be bold and remove crap, whether
> pointless hatnotes or anything else.
They are not pointless. Usually some form of disambi
David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/21 Tony Sidaway :
>
>> On 8/19/09, Carcharoth wrote:
>>
>
>
>>> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>>>
>
>
>> I don't see the problem here. Be bold and remove crap, whether
>> pointless hatnotes or anything else.
>>
>
>
> It's
"Carcharoth" wrote in message
news:206791b10908190851j6e4a8680jbc9a61bd0bd7e...@mail.gmail.com...
(snip)
> I am impressed, though, that we have this article:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_the_plankton
(...)
When you hav a body of water as big as the ocean, and it is fed by rivers,
"David Gerard" wrote in message
news:fbad4e140908191119i5ad73bd4sd5cbac1abaf78...@mail.gmail.com...
> 2009/8/19 stevertigo :
>> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>>> It boggles the mind to imagine what Pol Pot would have done
>>>with a nuclear facility; he could have outdone his relative, Stew Pot.
>
>> Ah.
2009/8/21 quiddity :
> For example, we have these pages, that are variously explicating,
> disambiguation, and listing:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(disambiguation)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_water
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:W
Carcharoth
> To: English Wikipedia
> Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 1:06 pm
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambiguations can
> be unencyclopedic and give the wrong impress
t that trivial disambiguations can be unencyclopedic?
>
> Carcharoth
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:59 AM, wrote:
>> I have no idea what you just ask. That's a lot of jargon for one
>> question.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
"David Gerard" wrote in message
news:fbad4e140908200334n759b844dn5a0918285f843...@mail.gmail.com...
> 2009/8/20 Carcharoth :
>
>> That is why I am saying that it is best to have a neutral form for
>> hatnotes:
>> "For other things with this name, see (disambiguation)".
>> Or whatever the st
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009, stevertigo wrote:
> Right. Its not about the number of clicks, or even the presence of
> alternative linkages - its about the odd and irritating addition of
> links to trivial topics at the top of substantive articles (hence the
> term "trivial disambiguation" or "trivial other
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Andrew Gray wrote:
> 2009/8/21 quiddity :
>
>> For example, we have these pages, that are variously explicating,
>> disambiguation, and listing:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(disambiguation)
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w
2009/8/21 Ken Arromdee :
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2009, stevertigo wrote:
>> Right. Its not about the number of clicks, or even the presence of
>> alternative linkages - its about the odd and irritating addition of
>> links to trivial topics at the top of substantive articles (hence the
>> term "trivial d
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/21 Tony Sidaway :
> > On 8/19/09, Carcharoth wrote:
>
> >> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>
> > I don't see the problem here. Be bold and remove crap, whether
> > pointless hatnotes or anything else.
>
>
> It's an
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/21 Tony Sidaway :
>> > On 8/19/09, Carcharoth wrote:
>>
>> >> Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks?
>>
>> > I don't see the problem here. Be bold and remove crap,
In a message dated 8/22/2009 12:42:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
carcharot...@googlemail.com writes:
> *a département of France
> *a French river
> *a French city
> *the French name for Vienna>>
-
The Council of Vienne.
Also apparently Vienne is a surname, I'm sure w
On 8/22/09, Carcharoth wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Tony >
> But you've used a two-item disambiguation *hatnote*, whereas what
> others (including me) would do is create a three-item disambiguation
> page and link that from the top of the two items in question (but not,
> obviously, f
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> carcharot...@googlemail.com writes:
>
>> *a département of France
>> *a French river
>> *a French city
>> *the French name for Vienna>>
>>
> -
>
> The Council of Vienne.
> Also apparently Vienne is a surname, I'm sure we can find SOME ob
You are, I believe, thinking of Vierne.
Philippe
--Original Message--
From: Ray Saintonge
Sender: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
To: English Wikipedia
ReplyTo: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes
Sent: Aug 22, 2009 4:48 PM
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> carcha
pbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote:
> You are, I believe, thinking of Vierne.
>
Thanks. I figured it out afterwards, but too late.
Ec
>
>> The Council of Vienne.
>> Also apparently Vienne is a surname, I'm sure we can find SOME obscure
>> person named Vienne
>>
> I have a vague recol
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> On 8/22/09, Carcharoth wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Tony >
>> But you've used a two-item disambiguation *hatnote*, whereas what
>> others (including me) would do is create a three-item disambiguation
>> page and link that from t
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 9:19 PM, wrote:
> In a message dated 8/22/2009 12:42:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> carcharot...@googlemail.com writes:
>
>
>> *a département of France
>> *a French river
>> *a French city
>> *the French name for Vienna
>
> -
>
> The Council of V
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
> Now I'm off to dump all this on "Vienne (disambiguation)" and then
> I'll go and moan at WikiProject Disambiguation about how one can't be
> expected go through all the 500+ links pointing at "Vienne" to see if
> any should be pointing to the
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Carcharoth
> wrote:
> Not sure whether to include all the "of Vienne" or "de Vienne" or not.
Perhaps on a separate page? Or altogether is probably fine.
> Hmm. My SUL (global account) didn't work on the Frenc
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Far worse than hatnotes, I'd say, are the ever-more-garish templates
> we now use for matters such as tagging for NPOV, cleanup, and so on.
> In my opinion we were better off when such templates produced a single
> line of italics akin to a h
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
> Now I'm off to dump all this on "Vienne (disambiguation)" and then
> I'll go and moan at WikiProject Disambiguation about how one can't be
> expected go through all the 500+ links pointing at "Vienne"
Do we not have a tool that would make this
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Andrew Gray wrote:
> 2009/8/21 quiddity :
>
> > For example, we have these pages, that are variously explicating,
> > disambiguation, and listing:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(disambiguation)
> > http://en.wikipedia
Anyone else see something wrong here?
[[Beauty contest]]
''A C-class article from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia''
:''For the concept in economics and game theory, see Keynesian beauty contest.''
A '''beauty contest''', or '''beauty pageant''', is a competition
based mainly...
-Stever
59 matches
Mail list logo
