Talk:Bulletproof (disambiguation)

Structure

why is there two section? seems like they could be amalgamated without any loss of meaning Mancgollum (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning is of no interest on Dab pages. Sections improve navigation to the entry the user is seeking.
--Jerzy•t 22:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BulletProof X

I've moved this troubled entry here:

BulletProof X, a fail-safe mode that will be used if X fails to start up

I changed it from BulletProofX to BulletProof X, since the G-hits favor no the space abt 2:1, but it's harder to tell whether the cap P is correct or not.
In any case, there is no coverage of it at X Window System. More info should be gathered before we try to work out the various issues. A stub would be a good starting place; entries that appear only on a Dab page get little attention, but even a bad stub is something more worthy of correction than a rdlk Dab entry.
--Jerzy•t 22:34 & 22:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on April 5, 2008

The point of a disambiguation page is not to list every possible definition or use of a particular word in the English language; disambiguation pages are meant to assist a Wikipedia user in finding an existing page whose topic is (or could be) the actual word used in their search query.

Please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) for more info.

Having said that, these are the edits I made to this page:

Removed any red-links or references to topics which do not have articles of their own and lack coverage elsewhere in Wikipedia (ex: Bulletproofing (reliability) and "Bulletproof, a mixtape made by G-Unit")
Removed links to topics which simply included the word "bulletproof" or the words "bullet proof", but which where not links to articles specifically on the topic of "bulletproof" or "bullet proof", (ex: Bulletproof Monk and Bulletproof Wallets).
- I did however leave the reference to the song Radiohead song "Bullet Proof... I Wish I Was" since I did see this song referred to as simply "Bulletproof" or "Bullet proof" on the web.
I also removed Bulletproof glass and Bullet-proof vest from the "See also" section; there are links to these articles on bulletproofing
- I suppose it could be argued that the other "See also" entries could be removed all together; anyone who feels the need to remove them is free to do so.

Marchije (talk) 01:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

_ _ I see yours as a fine edit, despite a few things i'd have handled differently.

_ _ I do read MoSDab as authorizing rdlk'd entries an editor believes can support an article, so i prefer to err in the permissive direction unless i have insight into the plausbility: e.g., my reasons for dropping the mixtape would be that mixtapes sound a dime a dozen, (especially after seeing part of High Fidelity (film) last week), and that pop-music articles that could be written, get written. On the other hand, i remember a treatise on bulletproofing (software) as serious reliability, that survives (back when the characteristics of keyboards were effectively programmed into every application) nightshift dispatchers who cope with boredom with "Well, what happens if you press three keys at once?" Equivalent concerns may be extinct in the age of, e.g., plug-in drivers, but at least its former existence is encyclopedic, and just bcz reliability's enuf easier now that "bulletproofing" seems redundant to "reliabilility", and isn't mentioned in reliability, doesn't make those studying 30-year-old exhortations to programmers obsolete. A lk from the accompanying Dab to reliability (and a bolded "bulletproofing" in its lead) are IMO appropriate.

_ _ Seeing your reworking,

Bulletproof refers to a subtance [sic] which has undergone the process of bulletproofing.

of my

Bulletproof is bulletproofing, resistance to penetrations by bullets.

sharpens for me the sense that the virtue of both our versions is sucking less, at this difficult and rare task, than

Bulletproof, material, or substance that is capable of resisting or stopping a bullet or high velocity missile

In as much as another edit is needed anyway, i'm trying out (without prejudice to yet further edits) what i arrive at after this analysis:

"Bulletproof" (when not the proper name of someone or a work) can grammatically be the subject of a sentence only (as in this one) between quotes, indicating creation of a noun representing the word, not the referent of that word.

Thus we should be starting either

"Bulletproof" ...

or

Being bulletproof...

I prefer "Being bulletproof is ...", bcz the standard format for a primary-topic Dab entry uses "is" rather than "refer[s] to", and bcz it doesn't require the additional level of abstraction of talking abt the word rather than using the word in its normal role, expressing its own meaning.

As to the predicative nominal or the appositive or the object of some preposition (the real heart of such an first line), i think i was wrong in implying that "bulletproofing [is the] resistance...", as you were implying that an adjective "refers to a substance ..." or for that matter "applies to a substance" that only connects to the title, "bulletproofing" thru 6 intervening words, let alone the adjective equating to a "material or substance...". This leads me to either, according to our respective styles,

To be bulletproof is to embody a bulletproofing technology.
(Or "Being bulletproof is embodying a bulletproofing technology.")

(Or "To be bulletproof is to embody bulletproofing technology."?
"Bulletproof" applies to garments or other equipment embodying a bulletproofing technology.
-- or
"Bulletproof" applies to garments or other equipment embodying bulletproofing technology.

I've gotten away from "subtance" by applying one of my own versions, above, that doesn't rely on a rename. But now lets talk further, and hopefully hear other voices.
--Jerzy•t 23:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]