Disambiguation | ||||
|
The discussion which led to the creation of this template can be found here Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote/Archive_3#Trivial_hatnote_links. -- Obi-Wan Kenobi ( talk) 13:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Currently, this template's focus seems to be on adding entries to the DAB page, however in my experience DAB pages tend to suffer far more from over-zealous adding of WP:DABNOT entries. "Helping" with a DAB page is rarely searching for new entries, since that often just expands the page with irrelevant cruft.
Further, the wording is wrong about deletion – in some circumstances (namely where the title doesn't contain "(disambiguation)" the correct action would be to replace the DAB page with a redirect, not delete it.
Thus I propose changing from this...
...to this...
Any thoughts or objections?
— me_ and 10:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
I think this template has a problem. It says that one subject is the primary and the other secondary? Is there any reason to assume this is always the case? Debresser ( talk) 17:13, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This template encourages editors to add partial title matches to dab pages.
I suggest we remove the last line:
"... Also consider adding the {{ look from}} and {{ in title}} templates to assist searches for the term in other articles' titles."
The problem is that these templates are search tools. Dab pages are not search indexes. As per WP:PARTIAL, only ambiguous terms are supposed to be in dab pages. This problem is especially prevalent with lists of people added to dab pages, but it's true for many other entries as well.
Dab pages are navigational aids for people looking up articles on ambiguous terms. They are not search indexes for all articles containing a term.
As per the Disambiguation Dos and Don'ts, editors are not supposed to "include every article containing the title." The template basically guides editors to do just that.
If this template includes guidance about search for pages to add to the dab page, it should also include clear guidance to avoid adding partial name matches for articles that do not have ambiguous titles. Coastside ( talk) 16:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
If this template really does lead to PTM entries, I don't think the solution is to remove the last sentence, but to address the point directly and add a reiteration of WP:PARTIAL. {{ look from}} and {{ in title}} appear at the bottom of many dabs – if this template encourages a PTM mindset, then so do those two. (I'm not saying they don't, but if they do, this isn't the right place to address it.) — swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 18:35, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
"This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title. Please expand it by adding additional topics to which the title can refer. However, please be sure to follow Wikipedia policy for disambiguation page entries, including policy on entries that should not be included. If no other ambiguous topics can be found within a reasonable time, the disambiguation page might be deleted. Also consider adding the {{ look from}} and {{ in title}} templates in the See also section of the disambiguation page to assist searches for the term in article titles that aren't ambiguous and therefore not included in the page." Coastside ( talk) 18:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
"This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title. Please expand it by adding additional topics to which the title refers, being sure to follow MOS guidelines. If no other topics can be found within a reasonable time, the disambiguation page might be deleted.
Coastside ( talk) 20:02, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Zackmann08: I changed the notice in this template as per the discussion above on this talk page, and I explained the reason for the change. You reverted it, and your explanation only mentioned "fixing duplicate args CAT:DUPARG" which doesn't address the concensus discussion. Can you please explain in more detail why you made this revert? Coastside ( talk) 22:05, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
|date=
parameters into the same template, raising "duplicate argument" errors. I think I've fixed it.
Certes (
talk) 22:23, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation | ||||
|
The discussion which led to the creation of this template can be found here Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote/Archive_3#Trivial_hatnote_links. -- Obi-Wan Kenobi ( talk) 13:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Currently, this template's focus seems to be on adding entries to the DAB page, however in my experience DAB pages tend to suffer far more from over-zealous adding of WP:DABNOT entries. "Helping" with a DAB page is rarely searching for new entries, since that often just expands the page with irrelevant cruft.
Further, the wording is wrong about deletion – in some circumstances (namely where the title doesn't contain "(disambiguation)" the correct action would be to replace the DAB page with a redirect, not delete it.
Thus I propose changing from this...
...to this...
Any thoughts or objections?
— me_ and 10:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
I think this template has a problem. It says that one subject is the primary and the other secondary? Is there any reason to assume this is always the case? Debresser ( talk) 17:13, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This template encourages editors to add partial title matches to dab pages.
I suggest we remove the last line:
"... Also consider adding the {{ look from}} and {{ in title}} templates to assist searches for the term in other articles' titles."
The problem is that these templates are search tools. Dab pages are not search indexes. As per WP:PARTIAL, only ambiguous terms are supposed to be in dab pages. This problem is especially prevalent with lists of people added to dab pages, but it's true for many other entries as well.
Dab pages are navigational aids for people looking up articles on ambiguous terms. They are not search indexes for all articles containing a term.
As per the Disambiguation Dos and Don'ts, editors are not supposed to "include every article containing the title." The template basically guides editors to do just that.
If this template includes guidance about search for pages to add to the dab page, it should also include clear guidance to avoid adding partial name matches for articles that do not have ambiguous titles. Coastside ( talk) 16:40, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
If this template really does lead to PTM entries, I don't think the solution is to remove the last sentence, but to address the point directly and add a reiteration of WP:PARTIAL. {{ look from}} and {{ in title}} appear at the bottom of many dabs – if this template encourages a PTM mindset, then so do those two. (I'm not saying they don't, but if they do, this isn't the right place to address it.) — swpb T • go beyond • bad idea 18:35, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
"This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title. Please expand it by adding additional topics to which the title can refer. However, please be sure to follow Wikipedia policy for disambiguation page entries, including policy on entries that should not be included. If no other ambiguous topics can be found within a reasonable time, the disambiguation page might be deleted. Also consider adding the {{ look from}} and {{ in title}} templates in the See also section of the disambiguation page to assist searches for the term in article titles that aren't ambiguous and therefore not included in the page." Coastside ( talk) 18:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
"This disambiguation page contains the primary topic and one other topic for the ambiguous title. Please expand it by adding additional topics to which the title refers, being sure to follow MOS guidelines. If no other topics can be found within a reasonable time, the disambiguation page might be deleted.
Coastside ( talk) 20:02, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
@ Zackmann08: I changed the notice in this template as per the discussion above on this talk page, and I explained the reason for the change. You reverted it, and your explanation only mentioned "fixing duplicate args CAT:DUPARG" which doesn't address the concensus discussion. Can you please explain in more detail why you made this revert? Coastside ( talk) 22:05, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
|date=
parameters into the same template, raising "duplicate argument" errors. I think I've fixed it.
Certes (
talk) 22:23, 27 January 2019 (UTC)