Wikipedia talk:Contents/Glossaries

message: Currently the entry on glossary just redirects to this entry. I suppose that there should be an entry for glossary. See also Ontology_(computer_science) Hirzel 11:34, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glossary article is missing 

message: I would strongly suggest that we put back the Reference section. Wiktionary is a sister project of Wikipedia. If people feel strongly that the items here should be all at Wikipedia, then we can move the GFDL contents over here to Wikipedia with no problem. The point of any page is to be a resource to our visitors, and removing relevant content is not necessary, imho. Brettz9 04:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed those items because they weren't glossaries. Lists of terms don't belong here, no matter how useful they are. Also, if some topic belongs in Wikipedia, then all you have to do is create an article. Rfrisbietalk 12:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  But if they link to definitions, I respectfully don't see any real difference--it's just a matter of display. As far as duplication, I personally think all of the work here should instead be moved to Wiktionary (albeit with a place for links to lead to Wiktionary), since that is the place which Wikimedia has set aside for short definitions. There is a lot of work going over at Wiktionary that I don't think needs to be duplicated (assuming Wiktionary is not going to be merged into Wikipedia given the tendency of people to want to bring everything into Wikipedia). Brettz9 08:19, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At least from the perspective of Wikipedia, the difference is between a "list of terms" (see :Category:Lists of terms), intended for words linked to articles (if they're "mislabeled," they're in the glossary), and a glossary (see :Category:Glossaries), intended for words and their definitions in the same place. It's a simple yet clear distinction. These Wikipedia:Contents pages are going through a major cleanup (see Wikipedia talk:Contents) to remove "off topic" links for given pages. Since Wikipedia is not a dictionary, I think the distinction should be maintained. At most, I believe Wictionary should be linked from the See also section, which it is. Rfrisbietalk 12:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of references section 

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 08:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: There was no discussion here about the move, nor was there even a link posted to a move discussion.  List are type of article and as such they belong in the main namespace.  See the WP:LIST guideline for clarification.  The Transhumanist 00:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion 

message: Desc Word; 'Miniwag'
I came across a word describing a young female between the ages of 10 and 14 years of age who has the follwoing character traits:
1) Has an interest in fashion.
2) Watches and takes great interest in fashion similar to the 'WAG' (Wivies and Girlfriends) of famous footballers.
3) Takes an intertest in all things up to the minute, latest mobile phones, IT, websites etc.
Can I ask has anyone else heard of this word for a young female...... M —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.100.216.206 (talk) 
:You could try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. They exist for asking questions about topics. Article talkpages (such as here) are just for discussing the article itself, not its topic in general. Thanks :) --Quiddity 16:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Miniwag

message: I'm using this page to test the process of transcluding contents page sections to multiple pages. You can see the related discussion at Portal talk:Contents#Topics-based contents pages project. You can see a working example of how a section here is transcluded to another page at Portal:Contents/Arts and culture. RichardF 23:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Topical contents pages transclusion test 

message: A group of editors is working on coordinating Portal:Contents and all of its subpages. This activity has two basic parts.  The simplest part is to coordinate their presentation, such as page layouts. Most of the discussions about how to accomplish this are at Portal talk:Contents. The more involved part is to coordinate their substance, such as what gets linked from the pages and their classifications. Most of the discussions about how to accomplish this are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Contents and related projects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists of basic topics, Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists of topics, Wikipedia:WikiProject Glossaries,  Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals and Wikipedia:WikiProject Categories. Please feel free to join in on these activities. RichardF (talk) 12:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinating Portal:Contents pages 

message: I'm not familiar with how WP handles glossary articles, but there are two new ones here: Glossary of Christian terms, Glossary of Jewish terms. Dunno if you want to add them to the portal or something. Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 19:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some new glossaries 

message: Being discussed again, at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Glossaries. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion was closed (no consensus) and archived: Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not/Archive_22#Glossaries —G716 <T·C> 07:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glossaries to Wiktionary 

message: List of Internet-related terminology at AfD here. Just a note. -- Quiddity (talk) 01:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD List of Internet-related terminology 

message: See Portal talk:Contents#Proposal: Use the same naming convention for all of this portal's subpages
The Transhumanist 21:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change proposal 

message: Portal:Contents/Glossaries/People and self is continually blank, with occasional vandalism and spam that gets reverted. What is this page for? Why does it even exist? It doesn't look useful for anything. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's primarily there, because all of the main Portal:Contents pages use the template Portal:Contents/Types layout as a structuring device. Could you semi-protect that section/page, perhaps? We'll presumably have something that fits in there, eventually... -- Quiddity (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I just came across this old thread that I forgot about. I have semi-protected it. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: What's the point of "People and self"?

message: There's a proposal to adjust one of the main section titles used in "Wikipedia's contents".  See Portal talk:Contents#Proposal for main section title adjustment. The Transhumanist 10:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to change a section title 

message: Include redirect WP:6 in a "Shortcuts" box. 71.146.20.62 (talk) 03:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: Add  to article. 60.248.176.205 (talk) 13:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: Please remove 
Computer games (Final Fantasy VII • Xenosaga)
from this page as they are not gloassaries
74.73.169.211 (talk) 07:12, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. —Quiddity (talk) 07:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 20 September 2012 

message: Should the article Glossary of video game terms be included here? Are there any requirements that it needs to meet before inclusion? The article's talk page has nothing that indicates it is currently within the scope of WikiProject Glossaries, although it is in the category Glossaries of computers. Hopefully someone here with more experience of glossaries on Wikipedia will be able to help, or should I be asking these questions at the WikiProject Glossaries talk page?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Communal t (talk • contribs) 16:44, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible addition: ''Glossary of video game terms''