Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MOS:DABACRO - not a great example

[edit]

The example given to illustrate MOS:DABACRO is itself concerned with acronyms. This makes it quite "meta" and harder to read and understand. An example using acronyms that are about something other than acronyms would make it much clearer in my opinion. --Jameboy (talk) 00:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have a particular example in mind? Paradoctor (talk) 00:50, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet. I'll go away and think of one. I may be a while. In the meantime please enjoy some smooth jazz. --Jameboy (talk) 10:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jameboy and Paradoctor: It's not hard to find violations of this policy (as I understand it) on most acronym DABs today.

SSB may refer to:

WPA may refer to:

POC may refer to:

JRB may refer to:

GWB may refer to:

Hoof Hearted (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Paradoctor (talk) 15:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence about wikidata and wikivoyage

[edit]

The current sentence in WP:DABSISTER about wikidata and wikivoyage makes no sense. The sentence reads as "Do not add entries where the content is on any other sister project, like Wikidata or Wikivoyage".

  1. EVERY Wikipedia article has an entry in Wikidata. Wikidata is the database used to connect entries between different languages. See for example the entry for Wikipedia on Wikidata.
  2. Not clear what is the purpose of this prohibition

I think the sentence should be about not linking to non-encyclopedic sister projects such as Wikidata or Wikivoyage, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 15:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata has had serious issues regarding verifiability and reliability. So, while we don’t mind if Wikidata takes its information from us, it does not work in the other direction. We don’t take information from Wikidata (except in the limited ways specified). Blueboar (talk) 16:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then it sounds like we don't wnat to link to it. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we absolutely should not be linking directly to wikidata from disambiguation pages. Although there has been some contention elsewhere about whether it might be acceptable to use wikidata with {{ill}} to provide links to multiple languages within articles. olderwiser 20:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You lost me. Why would it be acceptable to use {{ill}} to link to Wikidata? The Mountain of Eden (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest you look in the archives, both here and at the various Village Pump pages… we have had a LOT of discussions about how (and even whether) we should incorporate Wikidata. There is a lot of negativity about it. Blueboar (talk) 21:29, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't think it ever is. But in articles, there has been some contention about this. But for disambiguation page, it has never been appropriate. olderwiser 23:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thai nicknames as entries on disambiguation pages

[edit]

I am encountering an editing dispute. Unfortunately from an anonymous user and a banned sockpuppet, and reverted without explanation, but it is still a dispute that I would prefer not to be involved in. An entry I made to a disambiguation page for a common word which is used as a Thai nickname by an actor has been reverted twice. This actor is, as is a common Thai practice, often referred to by just that word, so I believe a link to her page is appropriate for that disambiguation page. Oddly, there is someone else on that same disambiguation page who is known primarily by such a nickname who has not been touched.

It would be good for the section on Given names or surnames as disambiguation entries were updated from

People who have the ambiguous term as surname or given name

to

People who have the ambiguous term as surname, given name, nickname, or professional name

Thisisnotatest (talk) 08:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is already obvious from the guidelines, because the formatting of the lead section of Intira Charoenpura says this name is used as such to refer to that person, in no uncertain terms, and there's also redirects Sine Jaroenpura and Sine Charoenpura.
IOW we can keep clarifying the guidelines but that's unlikely to help with people who can't read the actual article lead sections. --Joy (talk) 09:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Full stop

[edit]

Should the dab line have a period at the end? Some of the examples have one, while others do not. Christian75 (talk) 14:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, see MOS:DABPERIOD. Largoplazo (talk) 16:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The examples you refer to are introductory lines linking to a primary topic, not the normal entries. Paradoctor (talk) 17:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add example of synonym in taxonomy

[edit]

Under § Synonyms, I recommend we clarify what to do with a synonym in taxonomy. For example, at R. africana I made the change to blue link the actual name and not the synonym which goes against the statement simply use it as it is named, but is supported by § Items appearing within other articles. waddie96 ★ (talk) 15:00, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]