Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation pages with links/Archive 1

message: How do I edit the Esperanto Wiki to redirect Comic? Skeetch 03:09, Oct 29, 2003 (UTC)
:Hi. I'm not sure what it is you want to do:
*The esparanto wikipedia is at http://eo.wikipedia.org/.  If you want to edit a page there click on "Redaktu la paĝon" on the left margin;
*if you want to get to the "Komikso" page without being redirected to "Bildliteraturo" then this link should take you there (to get to a redirect page, click on the link next to "redirected from");
*if you want to change the interwiki link on "comic", then edit the "comic" article and change  eo:Komikso to eo:Bildliteraturo (or wherever you want the link to lead);  
*If I've completely confused you and not answered you question in any way .... let me know!
:sannse 09:53, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Vikipedio

message: It may make more sense to remove Vector from the list of disambiguation pages.  It contains pertinent discussion on the subject and there already exists a Vector (disambiguation) page.  Skeetch 20:19, Nov 10, 2003 (UTC)
:I agree that the discussion on Vector is relevant, but 1) Vector (disambiguation) redirects to Vector and 2) a quick sample suggests that most of the links should go directly to one of the detail pages. This is going to be a tough one. The proper goal may not be complete disambiguation but just a reduction of the volume. Rossami 22:50, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: vector seems to me considerably easier than pitch.  I think the disambiguation page for pitch could use some clean up.  There are multiple meanings defined on a single target, multiple targets for a single meaning, and more than two thirds of the offered meanings don't include targets.  Worse, when looking at the linking pages, quite a few of them fit multple meanings of pitch.  Seems hopeless.  --ssd 04:46, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just discovered that Vector (mathematics) is a redirect to Vector (spatial).  Maybe we should replace this redirect with a subdisambiguator, which would take the first bullet point from the main Vector page.  Of course it will mean that links'll need to point to another disambiguation page, but at least it's a more specialised one.  What does everyone think? -- Smjg 14:07, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think most vectors in math are spatial vectors anyway.  Even a 4-vector could be considered a spatial vector.   Matricies in this context are not vectors, only used to manipulate vectors.  It would be nice of the stuff under math were put in a more sane format, though. --ssd 04:41, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: NONSENSE!!  Many vectors are not in finite-dimensional spaces, and many are not in real spaces, and even if you were right, the article titled vector (spatial) is only about 3-dimensional real space. Michael Hardy 22:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vector and pitch

message: How does the search work when there is a redirect to the disambiguation page?  Will it count links in to both pages?  Or do both pages have be listed separately on the Wikipedia:Links to disambiguating pages page?  Rossami 02:45, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Preferrably the latter. Only links to the 'end' page are counted, the redirecting page counts only once (for itself linking to it), but not more than that. Andre Engels 16:18, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  search and redirects? 

message: For the new list I have also included all pages linked from "Wikipedia:Multiple-place names A" and the other 25 letters. There are quite a few of those that are not really disambiguation pages though. Just remove those that are not from this list. Andre Engels 09:08, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple place names

message: Gah! Function was just converted into a disambiguation page.  There's 549 links to it!!  This'll be a job to convert.  Granted, they did a really good job of constructing the disambiguation page, but I'm not sure page history was correctly copied, and I'm not convinced it should go here, rather than function (disambiguation) or something (which is a redirect). (Would this be less work to fix?)  Any comments on this before I start working on fixing these? --ssd 04:41, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What would we put at function in that case?  If it were just a redirect to function (disambiguation) then the links would need fixing anyway, and there doesn't seem to be a primary topic to put at the main article name (and really the links would need checking and fixing anyway).  So I'm afraid this is one that probably needs to be done... 'course, those who made the page a disambig should rightly do the work ;) -- sannse (talk) 10:05, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't mind doing some of 'em.  Spread the job, etc... Well, I've started anyway.  The "main" topic previously was (I think) function (mathematics), but looking at the links, there's quite a few things that were some other kind of function, so maybe the disambiguation page is best as the main page. --ssd 13:39, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: I'm almost done doing this one with Robbot, but even with the robot it's a hell of a job. I have left some links in biological meanings, because I was unsure whether to disambiguate them to purpose or to add a separate page for it. - Andre Engels 10:26, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Ya, I left those too.  I think some meanings of function don't exactly match purpose.  Perhaps another meaning is lurking there. ssd 14:04, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Function

message: I'm slowly working on it.  Feel free to join in!
By the way, does someone/something periodically run the automated update process?  How often does this happen?
:I would like to update it, but the problem is that the SQL search it requires takes longer than the 30 seconds that sysops are given for their queries. And that at the moment sysop SQL queries have been disabled completely. But to get to your question: No, it is not done periodically. The last updates have been (according to Page history)
:* 3-12-2002 by me
:* 8-2-2003 by Enchanter
:* 25-3-2003 by Sannse
:* 14-4-2003 by Sannse
:* 4-7-2003 by Sannse
:* 29-9-2003 by me
:* 11-10-2003 by me
:* 14-10-2003 by me
:* 20-10-2003 by me
:* 9-11-2003 by me
:* 13-12-2003 by me
:* 27-2-2004 by Sannse
- Andre Engels 10:37, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaning up Hebrew

message: I notice that a lot of the entries people finished left in with a comment "needs constant watching".  Considering that this page isn't getting regenerated very often, perhaps it should be split into links needing disambiguation and disambiguation pages fixed but frequently needing rechecks, where stuff doesn't get deleted from the latter... --ssd 05:15, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds OK to me, I have a similar list on my user page - but it's very out of date and a public list would be more useful IMO.  I suggest we only add the very commonly linked pages, otherwise it would simply end up as another list of all disambiguation pages. -- sannse (talk) 07:39, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  deleting finished entries 

message: AIUI, now that we're on MediaWiki 1.3, the links table works differently, and so tho above code fragments won't work - so, presumably, you need to do a nested SELECT to work out the article_id for the page Wikipedia:Links to disambiguating pages (?)...
James F. (talk) 19:45, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating now more difficult... 

message: What does Yugoslavia 243 do here? It is not a dab page. Mikkalai 03:40, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yugoslavia  

message: I have done some work on "script", but there is still a problem. There is no article for a comic book script or a theater script. What sould I do with these? Should I remove the wikilinks? Should I create wikilinks to non-existing articles and hope they get written by someone else? JoaoRicardo 01:10, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Script

message: (Moved from article)
* Do not include User and Talk namespaces in the count (links to IRC were 90% User: or Talk:). SeventyThree 02:44, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested improvements 

message: albeit slightly behind schedule. Yay! CAPS LOCK 07:16, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have completed disambiguation of Vietnamese 

message: I was working on the disney disambiguation page, and found that there was a template sitting on 200 pages or so that linked to the page.  So I tracked down the template and changed the link to "The walt disney company". 
I thought 'problem solved', and it should have been. However, many of these pages, including Captain Loyal Hawk, are still listed as linking to the disambiguation page, even though visiting the page itself shows no links to the disambiguation page. What am I missing?--Measure July 6, 2005 17:44 (UTC)
*That's just a bug of Wikipedia - when the template gets changed, you need to make a blank save (i.e. click edit, then click save without making any changes) to get the page to reset the template. -- BD2412 talk July 6, 2005 17:50 (UTC)
**Ok I'm confused.  I've been working on Director and there are several templates related to television shows.  I've gone in and corrected the template.  I then view a page that uses the template that I've never viewed and it has the correct link, but still shows up on the "what links here".  What am I missing?Barkeep49 16:41, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working on Disney, Template problem 

message: It is more important to have links disambiguated right than have them disambiguated fast. I just checked ten links on a word I was disambiguating slowly and which a disambiguator had raced past me on. One was probably the wrong dab, one almost certainly a suboptimal dab, one I had left ambiguous intentionally because the web leaves it unclear whether a general or specific sense is meant. Four of them ignored errors in the same sentence, and most left clumsy prose. 
I don't think this dabber was in any way to blame; but do remember that a link, once dabbed, may never be looked at again. Septentrionalis 02:17, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Please slow down

message: Is there ever a time when it is better to remove the link entirely?  I started to disambiguate "south" and one of the first links referred to the southern part of the state the article was about, call it "south Nebraska."  Since, naturally, there is no article which covers south Nebraska, the link is useless.  Or so it seems to me. –Shoaler (talk) 16:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In my experience, there is often a case for removing links. For example, an article may link to Japan and Japanese. The only appropriate link for the latter might be Japan, in which case there's no point creating a duplicate link; just unlink "Japanese". You just have to hope that no one restores the link latter. Agentsoo 14:22, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

text: **I just disambig'd my reply after realising I'd added another 8 links to dab pages to the pile *blush*.  And here's another example: in an article, I'd probably have removed the 3 links I've had to redirect to Wiktionary rather than their dab pages for the same reason you removed South ~ Veledan | Talk | c. 16:48, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove links?

message: Most other versions of Wikipedia (other than English) have implemented a system of categories that users can add themselves to on their user page - the English wikipedia up until now has had a very tangled and minimal system of categories for this and has mostly used a series of lists on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians page. For example, the Wikipedia:Alphabetical list of Wikipedians, which has spawned many errors in the past and grown almost the point of not being manageable. This entire system should be replaced by categories, such as :Category:Wikipedians and its subcategories such as :Category:Wikipedians by location and its subcategories such as :Category:Wikipedians in the United States (which would be the replacement for Wikipedia:Wikipedians/United States. Anybody who would like to lend a hand in converting these pages should refer to the changes that are slowly being made to Wikipedia:Wikipedians and the different emerging, afformentioned categories to find a starting place. Whenever a page in Wikipedia:Wikipedians is replaced, all links to that page should also be replaced with a link to the newly created category. Also, a hierarchy should be maintained among the categories (for example, :Category:Wikipedians in Acadia had been tagged in the :Category:Canadian Wikipedians category which is then tagged in the :Category:Wikipedians by location category which is, in turn, tagged in the master :Category:Wikipedians category.--thereverendeg 17:53, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  User lists to user categories transition 

message: M*A*S*H Whatlinkshere indicates quite a few links to the disambiguation page.  However, it appears this is due to a bad link in the template used to show a M*A*S*H character.  The problem is the template assumes a character is generic for both the film and the TV show.  Should I just leave the disambiguation intact as the template's context is technically ambiguous itself?
Example:

:: One possibility.  Unlink the reference in the top, and add separate links under the words "Film" and "Television" towards the bottom.  Then you have links to both, and the user can jump to each as desired.  Workable? TexasAndroid 20:11, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perfect! -- Nuggetboy 20:45, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation in M*A*S*H template 

message: I'm working through Vatican now...  the distinction between the Vatican (state) and the Holy See can be subtle, but never more so than when you have to decide just which one was responsible for sending immortal monster hunter Van Helsing after Dracula in the popular movie...?</br>
~ Veledan | Talk | c. 15:12, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vatican monster hunters from the Holy See