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.


Comments are requested at Talk:Lada (goddess) regarding what should be the primary topic for the term Lada, if any. Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Nota bene* The discussion is closed; the request was withdrawn. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 13:01, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Should Stones be a dab page?[edit]

I have reverted two editors now who have made this into a dab page, duplicating what can be found at Stone (disambiguation). It has redirected to rock (geology) for 12 years so I want to see some sort of consensus before the change happens. As far as I'm concerned the current target is the overwhelming primary topic for both the singular and plural. —Xezbeth (talk) 13:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Football (soccer) training game[edit]

Rondo is, it seems, also a well-recognised training game used by association football coaches/players. I'm not familiar enough with it to add myself though. Ride the Hurricane (talk) 10:35, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Done.swpbT go beyond 14:46, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


User:JMDGamotia is mass dab editing with a moderately high error rate per WP:MOSDAB. Several of us have pointed this out on their talk page. There may need some cleanup, and agreement for the editor to improve understanding before continuing at a rate of more than 5 dabs per day. Widefox; talk 22:54, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

User:JMDGamotia please discuss here, as you persist make mass edits with style issues - for example I undid this edit [1] should not use "a" etc for entries with persons per MOS:DABPEOPLE Do not include a, an or the before the description . Same here [2] . This [3] inserts wikiquote which I believe we don't do per not using many templates MOS:DABPIPING / MOS:DABICON. Widefox; talk 12:50, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Ping User:Bkonrad I see on Mortar you undid their edit [4], since then they persisted adding Wikicommons, and repeating unnessesary split [5] which incorrectly breaks the term "partial, differential equations". When reverted by me [6], without discussion it's been rebroken [7]. They're refusing to discuss, seems good faith but WP:CIR. Editor also logs out, so the IP edits belong to them (edit warring adding Wikicommons again). Widefox; talk 13:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I dunno. For the most part the edits amount to annoyances and irritations rather than outright errors. I'm not sure what can be done. There doesn't seem to be enough to pursue any sort of sanctions. olderwiser 19:18, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
With this many dab pages, refusing to discuss their edits while also slow edit warring at least one of them is a bit much. Take [8], there's many WP:PTM and a bad description for Energy storage. Revert and fix easiest. Widefox; talk 00:41, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Here [9] they've put Malibu, Baja California in the wrong country, and added another template (this time Wikivoyage). Widefox; talk 16:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
They're refusing to discuss [10]. Widefox; talk 14:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
How unpleasant. I'd support an ANI based on WP:HERE. Making work for others and refusing to learn not to is sanctionable. —swpbT go beyond 16:34, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Taking them to ANI might be the only solution. There's been plenty of cases where ANI has sanctioned/blocked editors for continually editing while refusing to engage in any community discussion. That being, said, while many of his changes are against MOS:DAB, I think in some cases, adding a template to a sister project besides wiktionary might be appropriate for a DAB page. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:45, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
I think they're WP:HERE apart from the Self-correction and heeding lessons bit. I made errors of this type when I started disambiguating (and still do, though hopefully less often). But I'm grateful when someone points out what I've done wrong and I try to learn from their advice (or, at the very least, politely explain why I disagree). Certes (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Agree with you all. Take Hoagy, they've been singlehandedly editing it for months. It was better before (the wikt link excepted). At the rate of several dabs a day, this is disruptive editing irrespective of HERE.
Sure, I've made similar dab mistakes to begin with, but it appears they're going to plough on regardless. WP:NOTHERE Little or no interest in working collaboratively. From what I can see, they've never interacted with another editor with their almost four year account. Their edit history is atypical...10 minor edits, none for a year, 3 mobile edits, none for a year, then 1st Jan 2017 mass dab editing starts.
I'm leaving this for others now, as I can't do more singlehandedly. Widefox; talk 11:18, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Dab fix null title[edit]

Disambiguation pages with links has an interesting new entry at #7: the null title! I hope I've fixed it with this edit but please feel free to improve things. Certes (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Lada (disambiguation) listed at Requested moves[edit]


A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lada (disambiguation) to be moved to Lada. This page is of interest to this WikiProject, and interested members may wish to participate in the discussion here. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 17:17, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

More opinions are welcome. Widefox; talk 13:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Pico Agudo[edit]

I'd welcome any suggestions to the dispute outlined on this page. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 10:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

  • How about doing something useful rather than just continually reverting other editors and forum-shopping to waste their time too? Andy Dingley (talk) 11:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
    • To Andy Dingley: Drop that tone right now. Boleyn isn't "forum shopping", she's elevating an unresolved dispute to the relevant WikiProject, which is exactly what she should do. I and many others know her to be a respectful and responsible editor; we don't know the same about you. You'd behoove yourself to stick strictly to the content disagreement here. —swpbT go beyond 16:42, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • All I've seen so far is edit-warring to waste other editor's time, repeatedly prodding and blanking a new page before the ink is dry on it, and gaining no support on the Talk: page, yet continuing despite. Why are they so keen to waste time on the talk: page, when they could have simply addressed the issue itself? Or at the very least, avoiding wasting the time of other editors who might then have been able to do so. A 6k talk: page, dwarfing the content page? This is just playing at bureaucracy because they'd rather do that than anything useful. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:00, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • gaining no support on the Talk: page You may want to check your facts on this. olderwiser 17:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Andy Dingley, probably best if you ping me before writing comments like the above. I haven't continually reverted editors, I've left it in a state where it clearly doesn't meet criteria, initiated a discussion informing the relevant Wikiproject, and have made sparing comments at the discussion as I did not want to dominate it in any way or edit war. I have not repeatedly prodded either; I prodded, you removed it, I tried to edit it in line with guidelines, you reverted it, so I did not add it again and initiated a discussion rather than going straight to AfD. I'm also unsure why my one neutrally-worded alert at the one Wikiproject was considered 'forum shopping'. I'm surprised you have written comments like this, it's quite unnecessary. Boleyn (talk) 19:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
To Andy Dingley: You're doing yourself no favors here. If there are diffs of Boleyn blanking, let's see them. Otherwise, drop it. Bkonrad is already questioning your facts, and that's not a road you want to go down. Forcing a discussion instead of giving in may be "bureaucracy" to you, but it's how wiki editing works. If you can't get comfortable with that, this may not be the project for you. The only thing we need to hear from you is your case for having the article a certain way, in light of the existing guidelines. If you really want to pursue a behavior complaint, you can take it to ANI, but I don't expect that would go very well. —swpbT go beyond 20:40, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I converted it to an SIA. If there's no progress on creating these articles then suggest we question the notability of the SIA and see how many valid dab entries there are at that point. Widefox; talk 11:42, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposal to tag all disambiguation links[edit]

Now that we have fewer than 20,000 disambiguation links in the entire project, I propose that we hire a bot to automatically tag all disambiguation links with the {{disambiguation needed}} tag. This would apply to all existing untagged links and all newly created links (although we could wait perhaps a week or ten days to see if new errors get fixed without such intervention). bd2412 T 19:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

That seems like a good idea if it could be done automatically & accurately (what about intentional dab links?). Would it also be worth putting a note on wikiproject talk pages highlighting the relevant links (eg this for India or this for albums) as this may bring expert eyes to links within a specific sphere of interest?— Rod talk
INTDABLINK disambiguation links are not errors (and are easily parseable because the link contains "(disambiguation)"), so would be exempt. It would definitely be useful to notify WikiProjects of pages in their bailiwick containing disambiguation links to be fixed. It might also be useful, if the Wiki-fu can be figured out, to notify the editor who added each link requiring repair. bd2412 T 22:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
I have now added a note with a project specific link to all projects showing as having more than 10 to do. Several are coming back saying they have dealt with all the ones in their specific area of interest.— Rod talk 20:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
That is an excellent start! bd2412 T 20:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Several projects are reporting issues with the OAuth tool, but lots have tackled dabs within their area of interest.— Rod talk 08:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
An interesting idea, but 20,000 links sounds a bit too many to tag. Do you know roughly the rates at which links to dab are created and being fixed (or just the net difference)? We do seem to be making good progress; most pages with 5+ incoming or 5+ outgoing links are cleared in a day or two and we're down to the "long tail" of odd links. Certes (talk) 23:04, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
To be clear, there aren't 20,000 links to tag, because many of these are already tagged (I don't know how many offhand, though). bd2412 T 23:32, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Update, according to this page, there are 6,942 transclusions of the {{disambiguation needed}} tag. According to the Daily Disambig, there are actually 18,628 disambiguation links to be fixed right now, so that would be about 12,000 new tags, minus whatever number of newly created links would likely be fixed before being tagged. bd2412 T 23:34, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't see any issues with the idea, although of course the bot will need to be sophisticated enough to: 1) skip links appearing within hatnotes, templates or tables, and 2) ignore dabs with a high number of incoming links (ideally we want a sensible human to verify that the dab page is not the result of a bad move or redirecting). I don't know whether this tagging would be needed: my impression was that the DPL crowd has been making quite some progress, and if they continue at that pace, soon there won't be any links left for tagging. – Uanfala (talk) 23:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
    • I believe that if all links are tagged, a good number will be fixed in short order by page watchers for those particular pages. Regular disambiguators are, of course, doing a great job, but the War on Error is perpetual. I'm not sure we need to skip dab links in hatnotes, templates, or tables, as long as the disambiguation tag doesn't break the template or table. An error is an error in a template or a table as much as it is in text. bd2412 T 00:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
      • Well, if the bot needs to figure out whether the tag will break the template then, it will need to be even more sophisticated. – Uanfala (talk) 00:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
        • True. We don't need to do everything at once. We can start by tagging all erroneous links in plain text, and see what effect that has. bd2412 T 01:09, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
        • Errors in templates are important because one simple edit can mend dozens of wikilinks, but they occur in small numbers and we can handle them manually. (Five today, all fixed.) Many dab links are generated by subtemplate calls such as {{Sportsballer|surname=Smith|forename=John}} which are harder for a bot to locate. Certes (talk) 01:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
          • I think he meant disambiguation pages in things like infoboxes (i.e., where the disambiguation link is generated by a parameter in the template, not in the template itself). bd2412 T 01:58, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
          • Me too: in my example, an article transcludes template "Infobox Someteam roster" which is a list of players, each entry using the Sportsballer subtemplate to create a link to a BLP. We have eight template problems today; someone's done five; I'll look at the other three. Certes (talk) 11:03, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Trains is having difficulties. I followed Rob's link there and clicked FIX for Locomotive: that page has two links to dab battery but I was only invited to fix one of them. Something may be amiss. Certes (talk) 00:21, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

  • One was to battery and the other was to batteries. I've fixed them both. The problem might arise from the second one being through a redirect. bd2412 T 00:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Support, with a reminder to the bot developer to take care re the subtleties noted above. And much appreciation to BD for sustained effort on this front, with great results. —swpbT go beyond 15:42, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Another benefit to tagging everything is that we will effectively datestamp all remaining links. I don't know how old the oldest untagged links are, but once all the links are tagged, we will at least know which ones postdate the initial effort to tag everything. bd2412 T 01:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
I am impressed by what you and others have done! Both in getting from >1 million to less than 20k, and in the notices to WikiProjects. I noticed wt:NRHP#Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject and took care of 5 or so of the 9 ambiguous links in the Wikiproject, and I posted there calling for some others with different expertise to fix one of the remaining ones. Thank you all for your continuing work on this, and nice job with enlisting Wikiprojects in a positive way. Tagging all the disambiguation links seems reasonable now, too, IMHO. --Doncram (talk) 03:11, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
Good work by project members; well done. On a related level, one tool that was in use to stay on top of new dabs appearing were notifications to those editors who created those links. I haven't seen those notifications in a while (I watch quite a number of user pages). Has this been discontinued? If so, could somebody please point me to some background to this? Schwede66 17:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I just received one of those notifications a few days ago, so I'm pretty sure the tool is still working. -- Fyrael (talk) 15:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • A quick update on the numbers. According to the Daily Disambig, here are now under 16,500 disambiguation links, so this would currently involve tagging about 9,500 links. bd2412 T 16:55, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
That's great news. I'd say give the wikiprojects a few more days to sort out links in their areas, then tag the remaining links. Certes (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Watchers will help clear this backlog very quickly, and often have the subject knowledge to know which possible link it should be changed to, which is sometimes difficult. Great idea! Boleyn (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Great - from a technical standpoint, what we need to do here is get a list of all links to disambiguation pages from mainspace pages that do not already have a {{disambiguation needed}} tag, then wait about ten days, then re-check that list to see what links from that initial list have been fixed, and then have a bot tag all remaining disambiguation links. bd2412 T 21:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Piped link as D-link[edit]

Your opinion is requested at Talk:Satanic panic#Piped link as disambiguation link. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:22, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Links broken on Wikproject page[edit]

Clicking on the large blue button "Open Dabfix" under Resources leads to
Vmavanti (talk) 18:04, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it seems that it does. @Dispenser: - this problem appears on User:Dispenser/MOS:DAB stats, from which the link transcludes, and appears to affect all subpages. bd2412 T 18:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
The site has moved. Links there (and on User:Dispenser/Checklinks and User:Dispenser/Checklinks/config/doc) should be read as Certes (talk) 18:49, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I changed the link to that and it seems to be working. Thanks! bd2412 T 19:01, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Hecke algebra#Proposal to convert this to a set index article[edit]

I tried to convert Hecke algebra to an SIA, but was reverted. I have therefore created Talk:Hecke algebra#Proposal to convert this to a set index article, to develop a consensus in favor of this change. Please weigh in on this discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Please come and help...[edit]

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Philip Murphy#Requested move 25 November 2017, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks,  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  01:45, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

request for a new disambiguation[edit]

Hi. I would like to request for a new disambiguation page, but I can't find the right place to ask for it. So I did it here Draft:Tony_Montana_(disambiguation). Thanks for help. (talk) 08:02, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. PamD 08:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC)