Talk:NSA (disambiguation)
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Nichirin Shoshu of America (NSA), now renamed Soka Gakkai International (SGI)- USA
NSA is not exclusive to the United States National Security Agency
[edit]A misguided redirect in a global resource caused just over 5000 page viewers seeking "NSA" to be redirected to the National Security Agency in the month of November without brakes and the redirect was introduced by a nameless Wikipedia editor who seems to think that the initials NSA 'are the same as' or primal to the National Security Agency despite the initials being used prior to their very existence as a company of the United States government. The statistics indicate that during the past year just over 66,000 views encountered by the NSA redirect rather than disambiguation page compared to the nearly 900,000 that the National Security Agency actually received were flawed and more than 60% of Wikipedia users were misdirected by the redirect, those 60% were looking for non-state actor and over thirty other possible results, that is 31,000 misguided users who would have been better served by this disambiguation page so I have corrected the redirect to favor transparency and reflect the encyclopedic policy of Wikipedia. Problemsmith (talk) 10:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- And what evidence suggests those 5000 readers were not looking for the national security agency? Rather than change the target of this redirect causing a malplaced disambiguation page, please gain consensus for moving the disambiguation page (instructions at WP:RM). Also consider the large number of articles that [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/NSA link to NSA which would need to be fixed before any such move. IMO, this is much the same case as FBI or KGB or NHS. older ≠ wiser 11:46, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- The great number of pages written by authors incorrectly is no justification for the direct link and bypassing this disambiguation page. The disambiguation should be as I had it as a forward progression, not a correction for those who arrived there accidently, and the disambiguation page serves a purpose letting the reader know that there are other terms expressed. So in essence you are inviting me to remove the National Security Agency from the "TOP" of the disambiguation page. My research when I started this was how many people were looking for non-state actor changing this was not my intention or cup of tea anyway. So have it as you will, it is arrogant and belligerent to supreme the United States Corporation it is racist, nationalist and supremacist with its working in the area of public diplomacy and soft power, a farse! Problemsmith (talk) 13:31, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- So no tangible evidence then? Empty hyperbole and invective is not very convincing. older ≠ wiser 13:36, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- The great number of pages written by authors incorrectly is no justification for the direct link and bypassing this disambiguation page. The disambiguation should be as I had it as a forward progression, not a correction for those who arrived there accidently, and the disambiguation page serves a purpose letting the reader know that there are other terms expressed. So in essence you are inviting me to remove the National Security Agency from the "TOP" of the disambiguation page. My research when I started this was how many people were looking for non-state actor changing this was not my intention or cup of tea anyway. So have it as you will, it is arrogant and belligerent to supreme the United States Corporation it is racist, nationalist and supremacist with its working in the area of public diplomacy and soft power, a farse! Problemsmith (talk) 13:31, 15 December 2017 (UTC)