Talk:Orange/Archive 1

Archive 1

Disambig

Some disambig pages are anticipating "ambiguity" that has yet to occur. --Ed Poor

Wouldn't it only be disambiguating if there would be multiple entries with exactly the same name? If I did a search for "Orange", I could find any of these.

Admittedly, orange color and orange fruit would meet this, but probably not the rest.

--Alan D

Origin of word

I believe the color Orange is the heraldic tincture used by the House of Orange, deriving its name from the Principality of Orange (France) and lending its name to the citrus fruit. John McPhee, Oranges. Wetman 09:42, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Page move

Any opinions about moving Orange (colour) here and this article to Orange (disambiguation). Whether we do so or not, the fruit will remain at Orange (fruit). This is a very big dis-ambiguation page. 66.32.248.67 23:01, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There's nothing inherently wrong with big disambiguation pages if there's a lot to disambiguate. See mercury, for example. And why not put Orange (fruit) here, then? We have 168 articles linking to Orange (fruit) and 132 to Orange (colour) (and 60 linking to the disambig page, incidentally, of which some should be corrected). But then again, Google gives 11 million hits for "orange" and "color", and only 5.3 million for "orange" and "fruit" (plus 1.45 million for "oranges").

I think the call is sufficiently close to keep the page as disambiguation, and force people to explicitly say whether they mean the colour or the fruit. I do think we could do with some reformatting to put the colour and the fruit prominently at the top, as the most common meanings. JRM 09:08, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)

"and 60 linking to the disambig page, incidentally, of which some should be corrected." What are you, terminally lazy? Go fix them already! JRM 00:35, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

Stop bossing me around! Done. 60 pages checked/edited, of which

18 wanted the fruit

16 were genuine links to the disambig page

12 wanted the color

8 were special and couldn't/shouldn't be edited

2 wanted the company

2 shouldn't have linked in the first place

1 wanted Orange, New South Wales

1 wanted Orange, Texas.

JRM 00:35, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

Just to drive home the point: is anyone still not convinced this disambiguation page is genuine and in the right place? Especially the fruit/color division will never be solved properly by moving one or the other here. Editors should always take care of checking their links, but when they don't, the disambig page is invaluable for spotting the otherwise invisible mistakes. JRM 00:43, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

Page move is done! The old page had a history (mostly appearing to be a c&p version of what's now at orange), so it's now at orange (disambiguation). Talrias (t | e | c) 19:42, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Shades of orange

In accordance with Wikipedia:Disambiguation, I'm removing the links that merely have "Orange" in the title, assuming that there is no risk of accidentally linking to them. Orange River, Orange Free State and the Orange Order are not ever just called "Orange", for example (but do correct me if I'm mistaken in any of these). The House of Orange-Nassau is a dubious case—it has been referred to it as the House of Orange or simply Orange in Dutch, but I doubt this use is very prevalent in English. Removed.

I think the additions to the word "orange" are now substantial enough to reinstate its own article, to prevent cluttering up the disambig page. The article is short, but not a stub, and it has been put in context. Here's to hoping the deletionists won't trounce all over it. JRM 01:47, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

People

I disagree with the People section, and believe it should be eliminated altogether, for the reasons I gave above, and will state more clearly below.

Neither on Google nor on the Orange Order page am I led to believe that the Order is commonly referred to as just "Orange". Nobody will link to this page while expecting to get Orange Order. As Wikipedia:Disambiguation states:

Disambiguation pages are not search indexes -- do not add links that merely contain part of the page title where there is no significant risk of confusion.

I find it hard to believe that people would confuse "Orange" with "Orange Order". The question is not: does "Orange Order" have something to do with plain "Orange"? The answer to that is obviously yes. The question is: if people link to Orange or otherwise jump directly to an article named Orange, is it in any way plausible that they meant to refer to the Orange Order? The answer to that is obviously no. Compare mercury: this page lists Freddie Mercury, Project Mercury and the Bristol Mercury, but only because all of these can be plausibly referred to with just "Mercury".

The same holds for the House of Orange-Nassau. There is no risk of confusing this with "Orange". In Dutch, there is: "Oranje" is used to refer to the House as a whole. But in English, this doesn't play. Even the main article on House of Orange-Nassau doesn't even once use the plain word "Orange" in this manner. I'm not going to be bold because I haven't seen consensus yet, add your support/opposition as appropriate.

(And yes, I have something to say about the etymology section as well, but let's take it one step at a time.) JRM 13:38, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)

For the Order, I have seen "Orange" without "Order" plenty of times, e.g. in the word "Orangemen".

I have seen plenty of times the House of Orange-Nassau referred to as the House of Orange.Anthony Appleyard 18:00, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

After some hefty searching, I'm now convinced that the House of Orange should stay. It appears that even in English, houses can be referred to by unqualified names: for example, Bernadotte; Romanov. In fact, there aren't even House of Bernadotte and House of Romanov articles, even though they're called that in the articles themselves... We seem to need some policy here: there is a Windsor disambig and thus a House of Windsor article (fair enough), there is a Bragança (royal house) (not House of Bragança, and the disambig page at Bragança doesn't mention it, which seems wrong), and there is a House of Dunkeld, but not Dunkeld! Some of this may just be assimilated from use in foreign cultures and match the predominant usage in English, and some of it may be genuinely mistaken. I'll leave all that for another day, however.

I still consider the Orange Order dubious. The word "Orangemen" isn't likely to sway me—it's an obvious derivative, and even if it's used in contexts where the Order isn't already known, Orangemen already redirects. These men are not just called "Oranges". However, since little harm comes from including superfluous disambig (unless the page gets very large), I think I'll just move on and leave it in. You say yes, I say no, so the sane thing to do appears to be to leave it in just in case.

Incidentally, this word put me on the track of Syracuse University. From that article: "Syracuse University's sports teams are officially known as the Orange, although the informal names of Orangemen and Orangewomen are still used." It seems we need another disambig entry... or do we? :-) JRM 20:33, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)

House of Orange link

To potential contributors: please don't change House of Orange to House of Orange-Nassau. I know this is where House of Orange redirects to, but that's what redirects are for. Note that the House of Orange was a separate historical entity that just happens to be mentioned in the main article instead, and that House is what "Orange" can refer to. We don't need disambig for House of Orange-Nassau, after all—the "Nassau" part sort of eliminates that need. JRM 20:45, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)

agreed Orange* RC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcnaranja (talk • contribs) 22:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Etymology

(Comment copied from JRM's talk page.)

Orange (word) is a specialized page which centers on the process of trying to find rhymes for the word. As the two etymologies apply to all the meanings of the word ""orange"", I thought that it was better to put the etymology in with the list of all the meanings. Anthony Appleyard 18:31, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Orange (word) is about the word "orange" in the English language. If it happens to focus on rhyming, that doesn't mean the etymology shouldn't be there. In fact, it's pretty silly to exclude it, and it's bloating the orange (fruit) article for no good reason.

Even if we consider that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, if we do have an article on a word, with encyclopedic information (like thou), there's no reason to exclude facts just because they would also end up in a dicdef. I've taken the liberty of moving the info and rewriting it. (And in fact, I'm still quite busy, but this particular edit has been lingering long enough.) JRM 02:23, 2004 Dec 5 (UTC)

Revised last para

I have rephrased the last paragraph -- was

• As the town of Orange, France; this name is probably Gaulish in origin. The House of Orange-Nassau originated from there (and from Nassau in Germany), and includes the royal family of the Netherlands, who ruled Great Britain and Ireland when the Orange Order formed and named themselves.

reason - the Orange Order was not formed until 1795 long after the House of O was on British throne. Orange Order mentioned earlier, so no need to increase prominence with second mention, but seems worth noting William of Orange specifically. --mervyn 14:04, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Too many Wikilinks and piping

from the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages):

• Unlike a regular article page, don't wikilink any other words in the line, unless they may be essential to help the reader determine which page they are looking for; these pages aren't for exploration, but only to help the user navigate to a specific place.
• Don't pipe the name of the links to the articles being listed, e.g. Moment (physics). In many cases this may be all the user needs to find what they're looking for.

I think if these guidelines were followed here the page would be a lot clearer and it would be easier to find the link you are looking for. --Vclaw 02:20, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Passion fruit

"...also known as passion fruit." Uh? Never heard of it called that and the orange fruit article doesn't mention it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.83.125.109 (talk) 08:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. 216.153.214.93 (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Orange (software)

This is open-source code for data mining, I believe. -- WillWare (talk) 02:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Clean up

This page appears to contain a number of partial title matches or other items that are not ambiguous. Some paring or possibly a split may be warranted. Cnilep (talk) 19:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? This page has, I believe, seen quite a bit of scrutiny from myself and others who try to remove such entries from disambiguation pages. Looking at it now, the only items I'd really question are Agent Orange and Orange Orange, but those don't seem egregious. I think we do try to err on the side of including questionable entries while excluding those that are blatantly unlikely to be referred to as just "Orange," such as A Clockwork Orange. Propaniac (talk) 21:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know whether these are referred to as "Orange", but here are the ones I have in mind:

• • • Prince of Orange
    • William III of Orange
    • Orange Institution
    • Independent Orange Order
    • Orange Democratic Movement
    • Orange Revolution
    • Orange Micro
    • Agent Orange

Also the 'See also' list at 'Geography' and people with the first (given) name Orange. Regarding people, I wonder if it would be advisable to split per MOS:DABNAME. In that case, mightn't Jeremiah Gottwald belong on the name list? Cnilep (talk) 15:41, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

My thoughts on each of these:

• Prince of Orange: I could very well be wrong, but I think it was fairly common in older times to refer to such a title simply by the principality it represents; for example, referring to the Duke of Buckingham as just Buckingham. By that rule, the Prince of Orange could be referred to as just Orange. So that's why I'd lean toward keeping that one.
• William III of Orange: See below.
• Orange Institution: This article gives me the sense that the organization adopted "Orange" as a kind of brand, used in many contexts for different things related to the institution; e.g., the "Orangemen." So it seems reasonable to say that the generic "Orange" may refer to this organization. (Orangeism also redirects there.)
• Independent Orange Order: Basically the same as above, but it's kind of a subtopic of Orange Institution, despite being a different organization (formed by exiles from the original organization), so I could see removing it. I could also see replacing both these entries with just one link to Orangeism, which (apparently) refers to a movement in support of William III of Orange, and the organizations dedicated to that cause. (Which then leads me back to thinking that if "Orangeism" is a movement supporting William III, then logically "Orange" must refer to William III as well.)
• Orange Democratic Movement: Kind of iffy, because I simply don't know whether people who would actually talk about the Orange Democratic Movement would be reasonably likely to refer to it as just "Orange." But a Google News Archives search turns up some headlines referring to "Orange team" and "Orange leaders" and the like, which is good enough for me to think that "Orange" is at least sometimes used to refer to that party.
• Orange Revolution: I found this in the article: "Orange was originally adopted by the Yushchenko's camp as the signifying color of his election campaign. Later the color gave name to an entire series of political terms, such as the Oranges (Pomaranchevi in Ukrainian) for his political camp and supporters. At the time when the mass protests grew, and especially when they brought about political change in the country, the term Orange Revolution came to represent the entire series of events." So it seems reasonable to include for the same reason that I believe references to the William III movement should be included.
• Orange Micro: It seems reasonable that people would refer to this company as just "Orange"; the "Micro" is just describing what they're selling, like "Smith Bicycles" or something. They also made the OrangePC (which redirects to the company), indicating use of just "Orange" as a brand.
• Agent Orange: Unless someone else wants to defend its inclusion, I'm okay with removing this one.

The "See also" part of the Geography section is basically there because people will inevitably try to add those entries here, and it makes sense to just link to those pages so they can see the right place to go to find that information. I don't see a big problem with it.

In regard to the People section: I guess technically that section is in violation of the MOS, and if you want to change or retitle the sections or create a new Orange (name) page, you can do that. It seems to me that DJ Orange and Jeremiah Gottwald should remain on the dab page in any case, however, because those two are likely to be referred to as just "Orange." Propaniac (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough; I don't think we have any strong disagreements. Just a few thoughts:

First, Prince of Orange once referred to the leader of the Principality of Orange, at which time the holder of the title was probably called "Orange". The title now refers to the heir apparent of the House of Orange-Nassau, who I don't believe is so labeled. (Orange-Nassau no longer claims Orange, which is in the French Republic.) Still, the historical usage may justify inclusion here.

Three items seem to relate to Orangeism, and only one of those three (William III) is likely called Orange. Maybe Orangeism needs content rather than a redirect?

I was fairly sure that the Orange Revolution was never called "Orange", but the media source you cite convinces me otherwise.

Finally, I guess the thing that really struck me is how (relatively) long the page is. Twice in the past year or so I have disambiguated links to this page, and nearly all of them meant either the fruit or the color (but there were enough others, like references to the phone company to make a long list inevitable). I think its this length that prejudices me toward deleting marginal cases. Even so, I wouldn't argue strongly for deletion of any of the items Propaniac suggests could be kept. Cnilep (talk) 19:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, historical usage does justify inclusion; it's not likely that someone's going to type in "Orange" looking for the "Prince of Orange" nowadays, but it's conceivable that they could be reading something historical that does use that appellation, and look for more information on the topic using that term. Like I said above, my tendency is to err on the side of including somewhat iffy or questionable entries. Actually, from what I've observed, of all the people who work on cleaning up disambiguation pages, I'm by far the most likely and eager to delete entries that don't seem like possible targets for the disambiguated term, because I hate dab pages being more cluttered and bloated than necessary. But in this case there seems to be a reasonable basis for all these entries being included.

I agree that the page is pretty long, but some dab pages just are. Since the colour and the fruit are at the top, 90% of people probably don't even look at anything past those two links, so for that reason, the size of this page bothers me less than a long disambiguation page where people were more likely to have to search through it to find what they were looking for. Propaniac (talk) 16:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1