Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Disambiguation
WikiProject icon This 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.
 

Proposal for updating Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)[edit]

Following a Request for Comment on the matter of ship article disambiguation, I have drafted an updated version of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships). The proposed text can be found at User:Saberwyn/Proposed ship naming and disambiguation conventions update. Your project is being notified because the major change revolves around the disambiguation of article titles.

The most significant change to the guideline is that the only form of disambiguation for articles on ships is the year of launch, expressed in the format "(yyyy)". All other forms of disambiguation are deprecated, such as pennant/hull number, ship prefix, or ship type. Using ship prefixes in article titles for civilian/merchant ships is also deprecated, unless part of the ship's "common name". Examples have been updated as a result of the RFC and other recent discussions, and in some cases, elaborated on. A list of other changes can be found at User:Saberwyn/Proposed ship naming and disambiguation conventions update#Summary of changes for proposal.

Discussion and comments are welcomed at User talk:Saberwyn/Proposed ship naming and disambiguation conventions update.

$100 in cash to any editor who can break my record in March.[edit]

Disambiguate March 2017 Bonus list

In March of 2012, I challenged myself and set the all-time record as Disambiguation Hall of Fame Bonus list champion (the bonus list includes all disambiguation links from disambiguation pages with four or fewer incoming links). The record I set is 4,936 bonus list links fixed in a single month. Since then no other editor has even come within a thousand fixes of my record. I therefore offer a bounty of one hundred dollars in cash to be awarded to any editor who can beat this feat in the March 2017 disambiguation contest. That comes to about two cents per edit, bearing in mind that the fix must be correct and has to stick. Five years is a long time for an editing record to stand. Let's see what happens. bd2412 T 04:23, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Best wishes for being willing to offer a real world incentive to fixing disambiguation links. Links needing disambiguation went a record low of 37,755 on August 14, 2016 and has since crept back up to 48,322. But getting 4936+ dab fixes is an entirely different challenge when there are 48,332 possible fixes now versus ~560,000 when the record was set in 2012. Beating 4936 just won't be possible unless only one editor works on dab links in March. The most fertile ground for disambiguating right now is probably the articles with 2+ dab links seen in Wikipedia:Disambiguation_pages_with_links/The_Daily_Disambig#Table_3 with roughly (200*5+200*4+600*3+3000*2) 6600 disambiguation links to fix. Most of the dab links for these articles date since the August 2016 low and are likely fairly easy to resolve. But 6600 easy fixes isn't enough to allow multiple editors to compete for a goal of 4937.
If you're willing to put 200 dollars up to incentivize bringing the dab link number back down to where it was last August (or lower), I'd suggest $100 for first place, $50 for second, $25 for third, $15 for fourth and $10 for fifth, not an all or nothing offer for a breaking a record that is no longer realistically breakable. Plantdrew (talk) 05:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, if the $100 threshold is not met, I will pay $80, $40, $20, $10, and $5 to the top 5 disambig fixers, as long as some neutral party will decide who they are and tell me. Winners can email me with how to send payment, such as US cash by mail. Dicklyon (talk) 05:29, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Plantdrew:, per the Daily Disambig, "On March 1, the Bonus List contained 39,941 links". That's enough links to be fixed for eight people to each fix 4,992 bonus list links. bd2412 T 00:22, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
The Bonus List headline number (under Table 3 in The Daily Disambig ) bounces around: 35-40k at the start of each month, it then reduces by a couple of hundred a day to 25-30k at the end - when User:DPL bot finds another 10k or so from somewhere or other. I suspect that the running numbers are based only on what it found on the 1st of each month, so they keep on going down until it does a new full sweep and collects the previous month's additions.
4,936 is impressive. I once managed 2,466, but that was in a 34-day month when DPL bot got indigestion. I can manage a steady 2,000+, but doubt if I'll ever nail even 2,500. Narky Blert (talk) 22:14, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
I've managed around 2000 fixes at that at WP:DBR/BSA in a month, but sometimes you can do 30 or so of those at once. How do we track how many someone is responsible for? E.g. If I anchor 3 incoming links to #Film to #Film and television wlll this be appropriately recorded? If I have edits until User:Banak (AWB), will those also count? Banak (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
@Banak: It's all automatically tracked by User:DPL bot, see the leaderboardDispenser 02:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
@Banak: - Both the Main and the Bonus List Leaderboards are here. Narky Blert (talk) 20:08, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Not participating but good luck to those who are entering and thank you T for putting this together. Mikejones675 (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Ragweed leaf beetle[edit]

Hi. I've just created an article about a leaf beetle, Zygogramma suturalis, which shares a common name with a different species Ophraella communa. The common name 'Ragweed leaf beetle' currently redirect to the latter page. It needs a disambiguation, but such witchcraft is currently beyond my ken. Here's hoping the fine folks here will be able to resolve. Zakhx150 (talk) 16:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Zakhx150: Done. Well, more precisely I converted it to an Animal common name set index article. Nick Number (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Nick Number: And super promptly too! My thanks.Zakhx150 (talk) 17:27, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Input sought[edit]

Input from this project would be useful at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 February 28#Robert Brown (botanist), particularly in relation to how WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies in this case. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Need help[edit]

I could use some help in explaining why Treaty of London is not a disambiguation page. The discussion is at Talk:Treaty of London#This is not a dab page, with some early comments on my talk page. Thanks. — Gorthian (talk) 19:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Ruddy[edit]

Recently Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruddy closed as "link to Wiktionary". The closing admin, User:Czar, implemented this by making Ruddy into a DAB with Wiktionary template and content merged from Ruddy (surname), as well as the names of several bird species.

The problem, as I see it, is that the non-surname content consists almost entirely of partial-name matches: mostly birds that are not, as far as I can see, called simply ruddies or the like. Would it make more sense to have the page contain only the content of the former surname page plus the Wiktionary template, maybe in a See also section?

I will invite WikiProject Color and WikiProject Birds to comment here, as someone from these three projects will no doubt have better ideas than I do. Cnilep (talk) 02:08, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm already proved wrong: Wiktionary suggests that ruddy ducks are indeed called ruddies. Cnilep (talk) 02:14, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I've added an entry under "Other Uses", which is a full-word match mentioned more than once in the target article (bloody). A command of British profanity can be useful even (or, especially?) when editing Wiki.
I can anecdotally confirm what Wiktionary says: British ornithologists do indeed call ruddy ducks "ruddies" for short. Narky Blert (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
A citation (not WP:RS) which uses "ruddy" as short for "ruddy duck". Narky Blert (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hordes of Greifenstein castles[edit]

  • Take a look at Greifenstein (disambiguation). It includes several castles all plausibly known as Greifenstein Castle, and poorly disambiguated. I can't face trying to sort them all out, but thought perhaps someone here might like to look them over and suggest appropriate changes/moves. DuncanHill (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
    • Done some cleanup. — Kpalion(talk) 01:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
      • There's a whole pile of them in German Wiki: de:Greifenstein - 10 with articles, 3 without. How's your mapreading? {{ping}} me if you fall across a head-scratching problem, I enjoy sorting out this sort of thing. Narky Blert (talk) 02:31, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Leftover redirects after dab -> SIA conversions[edit]

Ancient tree[edit]

Comments from project members are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ancient tree. — Gorthian (talk) 20:36, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

MIM and TNA[edit]

A row is developing, with accusations of edit-warring, mostly over whether it's necessary to include the abbreviation "(TNA)" alongside every entry, etc. See Talk:TNA#Reversionary_edits. PamD 09:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia Movement Strategy[edit]

Hi all. I'd like to invite you to participate in the Wikimedia Movement Strategy discussions, about our movement's overall goals, "What do we want to build or achieve together over the next 15 years?". It's currently in the first stage, of broad discussion. There are further details in the related metawiki pages (FAQ, lists of other simultaneous communities' discussions, etc). (Also, if you're interested in helping facilitate and summarize the discussions here, and to bring back here the summaries of what the other communities are discussing, please let me know. Thanks. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:50, 23 March 2017 (UTC)