Talk:PHD

Ph.D. links

I just undid the RV by JHunterJ in this edit per JHunterJ talk at Ph.D., "removing the Ph.D.s from the PHD dab is fine". I think that if we want to merge these, we should propose a merge and then merge these. Unlinking Ph.D. from this page and readding all the links is just unproductive. Not merging, and adding the links that people might think were PHD might be a good idea too. 0¹⁸ (talk) 16:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had forgotten about the conversation. IMO, PHD may indeed refer to Ph.D., so that should be linked here as well as on Ph.D. (disambiguation). So I suppose I have changed my mind. -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What would you say to redirecting Ph.D. (dab) here? 0¹⁸ (talk) 18:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The things that "Ph.D." may refer to is a subset of the things "PHD" may refer to. I think both dabs should continue to exist, and the things that either title may refer to should be listed on each. -- JHunterJ (talk) 19:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So the only thing I see a good argument against moving is the band, but I think there is also something to be said just moving the whole thing here and making the other a redirect. I don't like the subset idea because I think it is confusing, but if you still think it is best, just go for it. 0¹⁸ (talk) 04:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No rush. DO you think the readers who are entering either "PHD" or "Ph.D." in the search box would be confused? Or editors trying to add entries would be confused? -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If we redirect, nobody will be confused. If we don't, readers and readers cum editors could be confused. 0¹⁸ (talk) 13:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how the readers can be confused. If we redirect, that will only affect readers who were searching on "Ph.D.", and then they'll see a list of all "PHD" and "Ph.D." options, instead of just "Ph.D." options. They'd be less confused seeing only the "Ph.D." matches, and users searching on phd or PHD would see the larger set. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I agree with you now. 0¹⁸ (talk) 16:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor title (not only Philosophy)

Maybe I am a bit confused but I just tried to find out what the exact meaning of PhD behind someones name is (I am from Germany) and it seems (I derive this from what I have seen in dict.cc) that it seems to be used as the equivalent of the German "Dr." in its generic form (without specification of the exact discipline). Now I still don't know what the exact meaning of the other 2 letters is in this case and also why this is missing in this wikipedia entry. Shouldn't it be mentioned? Also some other wikipedia entries dealing with doctorate and promotion always come up with this highly confusing "Doctor in Philosophy" example almost as if there were no other types of doctors without this confusing similarity in the two letters "Ph". Maybe somebody who knows should add this meaning of PhD to the list, write the 3 unabbreviated words behind it and link to where it belongs. --82.83.199.3 (talk) 13:05, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not deleted

The entries here are those that are ambiguous with "Ph.D.". Readers who end up here are not looking for the ones that are not ambiguous with "Ph.D.", which is why another editor made PHD. If the dabs are to be combined, it should be at PHD, but this arrangement felt like it would better benefit the readers who are looking for one of the "Ph.D." ambiguous articles. -- JHunterJ (talk) 10:26, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JHunterJ, why don't you look at WP:DPAGES. It looks like we can choose either one or two pages. I agree two is best. In that case there should not be (much) overlap in links (piled higher and deeper seems like a good candidate for an exception to me), they should link to each other in see also, and the redirects should point correctly. 0¹⁸ (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we avoid the "why don't you"s, especially when they aren't particularly relevant to your initial reversion? I didn't realized that phd and PhD targeted the doctorate, however, so sure, removing the Ph.D.s from the PHD dab is fine. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Ph.D. (disambiguation) to PHD

There are overlaps in the content from these two articles. The only difference is title case and punctuation. +mt 01:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge done. Unfortunately the above discussion occurred in a different place, so I didn't see it until after merging the article pages, but the result of the merge should be noncontroversial nonetheless, given how short the page is. bd2412 T 19:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]