Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Disambiguation
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
 

Explanatory supplement on pageviews and primary topics[edit]

We need some sort of explanatory supplement on the use of pageviews in evaluating primary topics. At the moment the relevant section simply links to the tools and says the views are relevant, but there are many pitfalls in interpreting them, and they are not always obvious. I think we're being a bid bald in letting new editors find out about the limitations the way we have all done – by learning from our mistakes over countless RM discussions.

We need to provide some sort of guidance, but that would be too fine-grained for this page, so a separate explanatory supplement might be the way to go. I've got a first draft at Wikipedia:Pageviews and primary topics. This could definitely do with expansion, or at least more eyes on it. Please join in! – Uanfala (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

There's a lot of disagreement as to when, how, or whether to use pageviews in various RMs. Guidelines should reflect consensus, and I don't think there is any on exactly how to interpret pageviews in every circumstance. We can try to come up with something, but unless there's strong agreement that it really does reflect widespread consensus, it should remain an essay, at least for now. Station1 (talk) 21:33, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Well, disagreement in individual RMs comes at least in part from the way pageviews are always mixed in with other considerations. If we take them in isolation, I think we should be able to move towards some greater clarity, if not consensus. It's not about do's and dont's, but about things to bear in mind when looking at pageview data. What the tools show and what they don't, what the limitations are, etc. – Uanfala (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
Maybe. With that in mind, I've made some changes along those lines. Station1 (talk) 08:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Looks like a pretty useful reference guide. I've added massviews (great for comparing between disambiguated entries) and made some refinements to it. -- King of ♠ 00:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

RfC notice: Titles which are part of an ambiguous series[edit]

There is an ongoing RfC to clarify our stance on titles which form part of a numbered series whose meaning is not inherently apparent, and whether we should disambiguate for the purpose of clarity even when not strictly necessary. An example would be Symphony No. 104 (Haydn) (as there is no other notable "Symphony No. 104"), which is already covered by WP:MUSICSERIES, but this RfC would explore the application of this principle to other domains, such as sequentially numbered legislation. -- King of ♠ 03:24, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Redirects and disambiguation that treat the original term as non-existent[edit]

This is a small example of a larger problem. I just searched for the name Tiphaine, an historical character referenced in a book I am reading. There are lots and lots of real people named Tiphaine out there, as I found in my searches. Wikipedia, however, redefines the name, without any explanation, and opens a Tiffany disambiguation page. Users should at least be told why this is happening. Merry medievalist (talk) 12:39, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

@Merry medievalist: Good spot. I've created a new dab Tiphaine. Certes (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

National Trust[edit]

Why is National Trust listed as an example in WP:DABCONCEPT? That article is about a specific organisation in the UK. National trust, on the other hand, is closer to being a broad-concept article, but is actually just a list. I suggest we delete that specific example, as the other two will do. ― Hebsen (talk) 14:58, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

tndis or hndis?[edit]

I have created Mahmud I (disambiguation) and Mahmud II (disambiguation), and tagged them for the moment with {{disambiguation}}. What is the more appropriate tag here - {{disambiguation|hndis}} or {{disambiguation|tndis}}? And how should the {{DEFAULTSORT}} be structured? Henry II uses {{human name disambiguation|Henry 02}} but most similar articles don't give any clue as to sorting. Leschnei (talk) 14:35, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

hndis here, I think. The sequence suffix is still part of the "name", not a title. Default sort should follow that 02 example (WP:SORTKEY). -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I agree with JHJ: hndis. IMO, tndis is only right when a title precedes the personal name. (Cases where a title follows the name are rare, and more of a grey area.) I also agree about the sortkey; I suspect there are many DAB pages ending in a Roman numeral where no-one has thought to add one. Narky Blert (talk) 15:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I've changed the templates to {{human name disambiguation|Mahmud 01}} (and 02). And yes, most of the DAB pages that I looked at, that end with Roman numerals, have no sortkey. Leschnei (talk) 16:08, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
It is fortunate that the Roman numerals up to 38 are in alphabetical order apart from 9, 19 and 29. Certes (talk) 16:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
In theory, we could create a sortkey just for name-plus-Roman numeral combinations. There must be a few hundred of them. BD2412 T 16:48, 9 June 2020 (UTC)