Talk:Asylum
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Asylum page. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Destitute Asylum
[edit]Regarding capitalisation of Destitute Asylum, Google indisputably confirms that it should be capitalised. The only pages in which "destitute asylum" is not capitalised seem to be pages where it is part of a phrase such as "destitute asylum seekers" (meaning seekers of political asylum who are destitute).
If you try to filter out these irrelevant hits by searching for "destitute asylum" -seekers -seeker -applicants then the phrase is capitalised in every single one of the first twenty hits.
To the best of my knowledge, there has only ever been one institution known as a Destitute Asylum. If more than one has ever existed, then indeed it is a common noun and should not be capitalised. But that would not appear to be the case.
203.63.92.105 03:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Piped entries & psychiatric hospital
[edit]Regarding the recent changes to this page: Per WP:PIPING, except for the formatting of titled works, links on the ambiguous term should not be piped, and redirects that include the ambiguous term are preferred. Possibly orphan asylum should be removed altogether, since that term no longer appears in the target article, but the redirect Lunatic asylum, using a term mention in the lede of the target article should be used in place of the piped link. As for the link to Psychiatric hospital, I know from disambiguating incoming links to this dab page that that article is the intended target for many erroneous links and therefore is also likely to be a possible desired destination for a user who enters that term in the search box. I think that serving the demonstrated needs of users trumps the guideline, making this is an appropriate case for applying WP:IAR.--ShelfSkewed Talk 03:28, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the detailed explanation, ShelfSkewed. If you don't mind, I'd like to take some time to think this through carefully rather than just giving you a quick response. I think that between us we should be able to arrive at a sound resolution to the various issues that are involved. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 11:46, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- That sounds reasonable. Take all the time you need. --ShelfSkewed Talk 15:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Right of asylum which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)