Jump to content

User talk:Gloryshookthiswater

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gloryshookthiswater (talk | contribs) at 03:58, 18 August 2012 (→‎Control (2007 film)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, Gloryshookthiswater, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --IllaZilla (talk) 20:35, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is unnecessary to place a hatnote on this article pointing to Control (disambiguation). The title "Control (2007 film)" is so specifically disambiguated that there is little chance of a reader having arrived at the article looking for some other meaning of the word "control". Per Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Usage guidelines:

There is no need to add disambiguation links to a page whose name already clearly distinguishes itself from the generic term. For example, Solaris (1972 film) is clearly about one specific movie and not about any of the many other meanings of "Solaris". It is very unlikely that someone arriving there from within Wikipedia would have been looking for any other "Solaris", so it is unnecessary to add a link pointing to the Solaris disambiguation page. However, it would be perfectly appropriate to add a link to Solaris (novel) (but not, say, Solaris (operating system)) to its "See also" section.

--IllaZilla (talk) 20:35, 17 August 2012 (UTC) Thank you for your comment:[reply]

I agree you are right about the disambiguation policy. However there is a problem which you may not be aware of, please view the link below:
http://postimage.org/image/doz0wb1pz/
This is my desktop. In many areas such as where I am, googling control only brings up your movie article with no way to access other wikipedia articles apart from using the fairly inadequate Wikipedia search or otherwise guessing what wikipedians have named a particular thing. The interaction of google's policies and zealous wikipedians deleting such necessary links results in many pages becoming practically unreachable by a large number of people. I am a recovering wikipedian so I know what wikipedia should have and how to get it but the vast majority of passing viewers might either assume the article doesn't exist, try other search terms and finally give up or find the article after some effort and be annoyed, Please do not remove the link again. Thank you
P:S. you can view the traffic to Control(disambiguation) here:
http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/Control
I'm betting there will be a jump. Which would be a measure of the harmfulness of the deletion policy.
Gloryshookthiswater (talk) 22:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem you describe is a Google issue, not a Wikipedia issue. Google search results are affected by many criteria that are not under Wikipedia's control or influence. If readers wish to read other articles on Wikipedia titled "control" all they have to do is type "control" into the WP search box and they will be taken to control, which is a disambiguation page. There is no control (disambiguation)...it's a redirect to control. Hatnotes do not even appear in Google search results: For example, the Wikipedia article on fish begins with a hatnote to fish (disambiguation), but in a a Google search for fish one does not see the hatnote, one only sees the first sentence of the article's lead: "A fish is any member of a paraphyletic group of organisms that consist of all gill-bearing aquatic craniate animals that lack limbs with digits." Hatnoting the film article, therefore, does not even solve the problem you describe. The WP:DAB guideline exists for a reason. --IllaZilla (talk) 00:19, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

let us get some more opinions about this meanwhile please do not remove the link for a few days so I can show you the effect of what you are doing.Gloryshookthiswater (talk) 03:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]