Talk:MJ

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

why doesn't this page redirects to Michael Jackson

same as headlineTalk to Magibon 01:50, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are many more things in the world other than michael jackson that people care about that can be associated with MJ. (24.11.238.38 (talk) 19:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Should this disambiguation page list Michael Jackson and Michael Jordan?

Done

Also because the Michael Jackson article doesn't mention the term "MJ", so WP:DABSTYLE says that we can't list him here. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:04, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are lots and lots of references in very reliable sources with respect to Michael Jordan (e.g., How Michael Jordan Became MJ, With Help From Phil Jackson and Tex Winter, Chicago Magazine) and Michael Jackson (e.g., MJ's doc 'distracted with strippers'?, Times of India), so I have added those two back on WP:IAR principles if nothing else. In any event, Jordan's article discusses his company MJ Basketball Holdings, while Jackson's article mentions a move role as "Agent MJ"; and the acronym appears in many of the references in the footnotes to both articles. -- Glenfarclas (talk) 16:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If Michael Jordon and Michael Jackson are commonly referred to as "MJ" and there are lots of references saying so, then add "MJ" to the articles explicitly. WP:IAR allows you to ignore a rule If [it] prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia. In this case WP:DABSTYLE does not prevent us from improving Wikipedia - the clear and obvious improvement is to add the abbreviation to the articles, so that readers of the article will know about the abbreviation. The term being used in a reference is not sufficient; to paraphrase WP:DABSTYLE, the term in question must actually be described in the target article.

Note that MJ Basketball Holdings is a company, not the person Michael Jordan. There is currently no article for it, nor does any other article link to it, so it's not appropriate to list it on the disambiguation page. (Of course you could create such an article, if you felt so inclined.) Likewise "Agent MJ" is a fictional movie character, not the real person Michael Jackson. Again, there is no article, and nothing else links to it.

In the spirit of good faith I'll leave Jordan and Jackson on the disambiguation page for now - but ask that you add the abbreviation explicitly to the target articles, so that we can comply with WP:DABSTYLE. Mitch Ames (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editors are invited discuss the general problem of DABSTYLE-compliance at Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation#Acronyms. I have started that discussion as a direct result of the disagreement expressed above, and the new discussion explicitly includes this page. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have again removed Jackson and Jordan from the DAB page, in accordance with WP:DAB#Related subjects, abbreviations and acronyms, which says:

Do not add articles to abbreviation or acronym disambiguation pages unless the target article defines the acronym or abbreviation.

Neither Jackson's nor Jordan's articles currently define the term "MJ" to refer to those people.

As per the WP:DAB:

If an abbreviation is notable and verifiable, but not mentioned on the target article, consider adding it to the target article and then adding the entry to the disambiguation page.

Mitch Ames (talk) 12:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above also applies to Mick Jagger, who I've just removed. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So if someone were to go and edit those pages e.g. "Michael Joseph Jackson (MJ)" in the ledes it would suffice for entry here? All those people arguing against this is just being political, it is not in the spirit of Wikipedia to exclude this common abbreviation. -- 124.150.99.182 (talk) 12:37, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not sufficient to just add "MJ" to the article - you also need to cite a reliable source for the "common" use of the abbreviation. Presumably it should not be difficult to provide such a source, if the abbreviation is indeed common. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An ounce of common sense is needed. Unless you are seriously questioning that either Jordan or Jackson were commonly referenced as MJ -- which is self-evident from a cursory google -- both articles do mention references to the people as MJ. There is no requirement that the description be explicit in the lede. older ≠ wiser 13:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I have mentioned before (2011-04-16):

Michel Jackson's article does not refer to him as "MJ". It only refers to the fictional character Agent MJ that was played by Jackson. That character does not have an article, but is probably sufficiently significant in the movie Miss Cast Away and the Island Girls to justify a mention and a link to the movie page.
Michael Jordan's article also does not refer to him as "MJ". It only refers to his company "MJ Basketball Holdings". That company does not have an article.

Appearance in a "cursory google" search is not, in itself, sufficient evidence of the use of the abbreviation. If these people are verifiably well known by their initials, then please add that fact to the articles, citing reliable sources - which presumably won't be difficult to find if the usage is so common.

If you disagree with WP:DABACRONYM, please discuss the matter on that guideline's talk page, with a view to getting it changed. In the meantime, please follow the guideline. Thank-you, Mitch Ames (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The articles themselves identify them with these initials. That is sufficient. Period. older ≠ wiser 13:08, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every time I remove Jackson and Jordon from the DAB page, I check the target article, and every time I cannot find any mention of the initials in the article text. If they are there, please point me to the appropriate sections and/or quote the text from the article.

You mentioned some instances above, although you dismissed them. Also, many of the references in both article use MJ to refer to the subject (that's the title of the references, examining the body of references would undoubtedly turn up many more). While I very strongly think this is an ideal example of when IAR and common sense should be applied, I have asked at the talk page of both articles if an explicit mention can be included in the articles. older ≠ wiser 14:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The instances of MJ that I mentioned - Agent MJ and MJ Basketball Holdings - are (as I explicitly stated) not the real people Jackson and Jordon. They are a fictional character in a movie and a company respectively. While some references use the acronym, I don't believe that this complies with the intent of WP:DABACRONYM. I disagree that WP:IAR should apply here, because it applies "if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia". However DABACRONYM does not prevent us from improving Wikipedia; the obvious (and, IMO, common sense) way to improve Wikipedia in this case is to add a mention of the acronym to the target article text (with an appropriate ref) - which is what I have repeatedly suggested that people do. If the use of the acronym is so easily verifiable, I don't understand why you (or any of the other editors) haven't just fixed the target articles. However, given that you have raised the matter on the talk pages of the target articles, in the spirit of negotiation and WP:3RR I'll leave the entries on the DAB page for now, and see if someone will add the requested information to the articles. Mitch Ames (talk) 15:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And what do you think MJ stands for in Agent MJ and MJ Basketball Holdings? Do you seriously question that either person is commonly referred to as MJ? I'm serious. If you question that, then we live on different planets altogether. If you don't question that, then it is a matter of using common sense to serve readers. WP:IAR and WP:common sense are exactly appropriate here. You know something to be true and it can reasonably be inferred from the articles (even in their present state). I would add the references to the articles myself, though I feel somewhat stupid adding something so trivial to such high-profile articles. older ≠ wiser 15:10, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disputing that Agent MJ and MJ Basketball Holdings were named after the real people in question, but those entities are not the same as the real people. The fictional character Agent MJ might be named after a real person, but the character is not the same as the real person. Hence my addition of the "Agent MJ" entry, and its appropriate link to the movie. Likewise a company can be named after a person - but again they are different things, which should have specifically and correctly worded and linked entries on the DAB page. If the company is notable, it can have its own article. If not - and not a significant part of the named person's article - then it does not belong on a DAB page.

I don't know whether the real people are often referred to by their initials, because the article doesn't tell me - and if they are, the article should say so.

And I repeat:

There's no need to ignore the DABACRONYM policy, because we can "fix" Wikipedia without ignoring it - by updating the article to add an apparently meaningful fact.
If you disagree with the policy, please take it up on the policy talk page.

I suggest that we should stop arguing the matter for at least a few days, to let someone have a chance to add the acronyms to the target articles. Mitch Ames (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's no easy place to mention "MJ" in the Michael Jordan article, and I don't think we should be shoehorning an awkward sentence into an FA for the sake of a disambiguation page. But "MJ" is obviously used as his nickname; see [1]. Zagalejo^^^ 18:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blind adherence to the literal text of guidelines when common sense indicates otherwise is precisely what WP:IAR is about. Despite your denial, it can be easily inferred by any reasonable person looking at the articles that "MJ" is used to refer to either person (or associated enterprises). If we insist upon following WP:OBVIOUS to the extreme, we might as well all be writing for the Simple English Wikipedia. older ≠ wiser 15:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The acronyms - with citations - have been added to the target articles. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LAPA IATA Code

Is there any reason the LAPA IATA Code, MJ was removed? Maybe it was too short, could have been for example: IATA airline designator for Líneas Aéreas Privadas Argentinas (LAPA) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.2.0.201 (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning in Deadpool &Wolverine

Marvel's Jesus

הראש (talk) 11:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]