![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
I'm not sure what was meant by "uncivil", but it sounds like an editorial jab to me. -- Beland 03:37, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) im black
A disambiguation page is not an article. Its purpose is to navigate people to their desired article quickly. Excess wikilinks slow down this naviagion, so I have reverted back to the version with only essential wikilinks. -- Commander Keane 06:37, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
Hi i'm back. That point you're making is quite debatable. i wouldn't want to open a lengthy discussion here because i have no hard feelings over these things. i checked several major disambiguation pages and they don't all follow your style. So i suggest you bring it to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) if you wish to. Anyway there were a few things i added besides the wikilinks, so i'm being bold and going ahead to add them back in alright? :) -- Plastictv 07:28, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
There is also a The Sun magazine, see here: [1] . Might be worth mentioning if it's not already. -- DanielCD 20:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Am I the only one who thinks that the star we orbit is a tad more important than the British tabloid newspaper? I think that 'The Sun' should give the star not the newspaper by default. SmokeyTheCat 15:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
As part of my cleanup of the page, I merged the formerly separate-sections "Canadian newspapers owned by Sun Media" and "Historical newspapers" with the other papers under a single "Newspapers" heading. I didn't see much point in separating them out, especially as a) it seems unlikely that people would know whether a given Canadian newspaper was owned by Sun Media or not, and b) the New York Sun that existed until 2008 was listed under "historical", and not "current or recent newspapers" -- if 2008 isn't recent, then what do these headings mean, really? Even for older papers, it's reasonable to guess that someone who's looking up a newspaper that existed a long time ago might not know whether that newspaper is still in operation or not. But they would probably know where it was published.
I also removed The Sun (Nigeria) from the list, because I couldn't find any article to bluelink for it (as required by MOS:DP; the purpose of disambiguation is because Wikipedia has information on multiple topics by the same name; if Wikipedia doesn't have any information on this newspaper, there's no purpose in including it on a disambiguation page). It wasn't mentioned in Lagos or Nigeria that I could find.
I also moved most of the people to the list at Sun (surname), since there didn't seem to be any logic to which people were listed here and which were listed there (and there was quite a bit of overlap between the two already). Propaniac ( talk) 20:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
One of the most common usages of sun is as a synonym of star or specifically for a star at the centre of a planetary system. I have tried to add this numerous times but it was reverted for no apparent reason. I will stop adding it when someone can prove it's wrong or it contradicts Wikipedia policy or guidelines. Just in case anyone was wondering, here are some dictionaries who agree: Oxford Dictionaries Online, Merriam-Webster, OED. McLerristarr | Mclay1 01:33, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
It seems to me there are two ways this could have been handled:
I'm really not sure why the second course would be taken. I'm in favor of keeping cruft out of dab pages, but this does not appear to me to be cruft.-- NapoliRoma ( talk) 17:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
I'm not sure what was meant by "uncivil", but it sounds like an editorial jab to me. -- Beland 03:37, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) im black
A disambiguation page is not an article. Its purpose is to navigate people to their desired article quickly. Excess wikilinks slow down this naviagion, so I have reverted back to the version with only essential wikilinks. -- Commander Keane 06:37, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
Hi i'm back. That point you're making is quite debatable. i wouldn't want to open a lengthy discussion here because i have no hard feelings over these things. i checked several major disambiguation pages and they don't all follow your style. So i suggest you bring it to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) if you wish to. Anyway there were a few things i added besides the wikilinks, so i'm being bold and going ahead to add them back in alright? :) -- Plastictv 07:28, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
There is also a The Sun magazine, see here: [1] . Might be worth mentioning if it's not already. -- DanielCD 20:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Am I the only one who thinks that the star we orbit is a tad more important than the British tabloid newspaper? I think that 'The Sun' should give the star not the newspaper by default. SmokeyTheCat 15:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
As part of my cleanup of the page, I merged the formerly separate-sections "Canadian newspapers owned by Sun Media" and "Historical newspapers" with the other papers under a single "Newspapers" heading. I didn't see much point in separating them out, especially as a) it seems unlikely that people would know whether a given Canadian newspaper was owned by Sun Media or not, and b) the New York Sun that existed until 2008 was listed under "historical", and not "current or recent newspapers" -- if 2008 isn't recent, then what do these headings mean, really? Even for older papers, it's reasonable to guess that someone who's looking up a newspaper that existed a long time ago might not know whether that newspaper is still in operation or not. But they would probably know where it was published.
I also removed The Sun (Nigeria) from the list, because I couldn't find any article to bluelink for it (as required by MOS:DP; the purpose of disambiguation is because Wikipedia has information on multiple topics by the same name; if Wikipedia doesn't have any information on this newspaper, there's no purpose in including it on a disambiguation page). It wasn't mentioned in Lagos or Nigeria that I could find.
I also moved most of the people to the list at Sun (surname), since there didn't seem to be any logic to which people were listed here and which were listed there (and there was quite a bit of overlap between the two already). Propaniac ( talk) 20:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
One of the most common usages of sun is as a synonym of star or specifically for a star at the centre of a planetary system. I have tried to add this numerous times but it was reverted for no apparent reason. I will stop adding it when someone can prove it's wrong or it contradicts Wikipedia policy or guidelines. Just in case anyone was wondering, here are some dictionaries who agree: Oxford Dictionaries Online, Merriam-Webster, OED. McLerristarr | Mclay1 01:33, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
It seems to me there are two ways this could have been handled:
I'm really not sure why the second course would be taken. I'm in favor of keeping cruft out of dab pages, but this does not appear to me to be cruft.-- NapoliRoma ( talk) 17:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)