Talk:Round Island

message: I gleaned or deleted the following red links from the dab page...
* Round Island (Hong Kong)
* Round Island (Massachusetts)
* Round Island (U.K.)
* Round Island (Walrus Islands)
... but perhaps some people will initiate relevant articles and add them to the page. -- Muffuletta 03:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More Round Islands

message: * Round Island, name of four small islands in various districts of British Columbia
* Round Island, Manitoba
* Round Island, New Brunswick
* Round Island, Newfoundland and Labrador (also Harbour Round Island, Round Bottle Island, Round Head Island, Round Island Bank, Round Island Lake, Round Shag Island, and Round Wolf Island)
* Round Island (Nunavut) (two: Coutts Inlet, Baffin Bay, and Cross Bay, Chesterfield Inlet; there is also a Round Rocks Island)
* Round Island, name of nine small islands of Ontario
* Île Ronde, French for Round Island, of which there are 38 instances in Quebec, among which:
** Île Ronde (Îles Laval), in the Rivière des Prairies, Quebec
(Salvaged from the repeated gutting the disambiguation page has gone through) Urhixidur (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no gutting. The entries were not valid for inclusion on the disambiguation page as the term was not mentioned in the linked article, which is a requirement. If you want to create a list article, such as List of islands named Round Island or some such, with appropriate sourcing for each of the entries, that might be one approach, but including unsupported entries on the disambiguation page is not. older ≠ wiser 00:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I see it as gutting because it diminishes the information content of Wikipedia (yes, I'm an unabashed inclusivist). The entries are not "unsupported": they are obtained directly from reliable sources such as the Atlas of Canada. But a disambiguation page is not the place to put outgoing reference links, a page such as "List of islands named ...", as you say, is more appropriate. On the other hand, creating such a page seems a little like overkill. I guess I'm objecting to a very narrow reading of the style guide that "forbids" (Prussian approach: "does not explicitly allow") including informative yet linkless entries, or linked to pertinent pages that do not explicitly mention the topic in question. Frankly, we need a template for what are bound to be numerous "List of islands named ..." pages. Urhixidur (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Update: It looks like the "List of islands of <country>" and "List of islands by name (<initial>)" pages are more pertinent. Urhixidur (talk) 13:19, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

text:  List of islands by name (R) updated. Urhixidur (talk) 18:09, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The entries on the disambiguation page were entirely unsupported by any article in Wikipedia. Sources and references do not go on disambiguation pages because disambiguation pages are navigational aides to help readers find existing content on Wikipedia. Disambiguation pages are not the place to insert information that is not supported by existing articles. I.e., while it is quite likely that you are correct that you found this information in a reliable source, there is no way for anyone else to know that from the disambiguation page. Someone less scrupulous than you could come along and add completely made up information and there would be no way to tell the difference. older ≠ wiser 01:22, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canada