User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 87

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Bkonrad. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 80

←

Archive 85

Why you anyhow delete my stuff?

It's a widely known fact, and it belongs there Mxzbz (talk) 11:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

No, disambiguation pages are not guides to slang usage. The sole purpose is to help readers navigate to existing content on Wikipedia. older ≠ wiser 12:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Slang on DABs

Hi BK. I was looking for a second opinion about slang on DABs and I see you've recently dealt with some! I thought breast would be an allowable exception to MOS:DABMENTION on hooter, much like boob (where it's the primary topic!) It seems so common to me, yet not something that would be explicitly stated and cited on the target page. Also, since those DABs are relatively short, I didn't think it would impede quick navigation. I also think this contrasts with Uranus, where I think that usage is more of a pun than a slang. Would you agree with that assessment? Hoof Hearted (talk) 19:31, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Program

Hi. I just took action against the socks disrupting the above article. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jurijus Pacalovas. I also noticed that you semi'ed Program indefinitely. I agree the article should be protected, but "forever"? Other than your entries in the protection log between July 3 and 6, the last time it was protected was in 2009 for one day. I can't see how indefinite is justifiable. What about two weeks, which seems like more than enough? BTW, I also find it interesting that despite having been an administrator for six years, I still keep coming across administrators I've never heard of and who have probably never heard of me, either. It's good to meet you.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:30, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Bbb23, Thanks for the note. No I hadn't meant to set it to indef. I thought I had changed it, but I guess not. I reset it now. older ≠ wiser 18:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

About Gandaki

Hi, Bkonrad you canceled my redirect Gandaki to Gandaki Pradesh. You should know that Gandaki is now a province in Nepal, so in today's term Gandaki must be redirected to Gandaki Pradesh. The word "Pradesh" mean Province only. We mostly time not include word "Pradesh" with Province name: e.g. Karnali Pradesh and Karnali. __ 👤Raju💌 01:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Just being the name of a province does not necessarily make something the primary topic for a term. I'd suggest establishing consensus via a requested move. older ≠ wiser 02:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Doe disambig page dispute

dont change pages , DOE is a 21st century culture read up on it. --Doegang231 (talk) 08:59, 16 July 2018 (UTC)y0urat0ss3r

First off, do not add "Dank of England" to the Doe disambig page, especially when the page on "Dank of England" does not exist yet. You will have to create a draft page "Dank of England" and find reliable sources. Secondly, this very heading had to be changed because it constitutes a personal attack. Try and be constructive so that I don't have to alert admins. CommanderOzEvolved (talk) 09:19, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

merge of blankets

I have merged Blankets (disambiguation) to Blanket (disambiguation) as there is a merge tag and it has information Blanket (disambiguation)#In art, entertainment, and media

Blankets may refer to:

Blankets (comics), a graphic novel by Craig Thompson.
Blankets (album), an accompaniment to aforementioned novel from Tracker, an American indie rock act
Plural of Blanket

Reading

Here you stated in the edit summary "there should be no text between the TOC and first heading per WP:ACCESS". Could you help me understand that please by pointing me to the relevant bit of the guidance? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:50, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Shhhnotsoloud Hmm, I thought WP:ACCESS would have something about this as it is an accessibility issue for screen readers. But turns out it is in other guidelines referenced there. WP:TOC says if there is any text at all between the TOC and the first heading, this will cause problems with accessibility. MOS:LEADORDER says If you must use a floated TOC, put it below the lead section in the wiki markup for consistency. Users of screen readers expect the table of contents to follow the introductory text; they will also miss any text placed between the TOC and the first heading. older ≠ wiser 19:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks: I see. The problem is that with a lengthy preamble of common noun uses, in my laptop view the TOC half disappears below the bottom of the screen, and with a lengthy page I think it's important to have the TOC at the top. To resolve the issue I've put all the common noun uses into a section and not the "lead". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:01, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Hatnote in Die

The lead sentence in the Die article is a prime candidate for the use of a hatnote - indeed, not using a hatnote, and keeping the sentence the way it is, is confusing: the article's about the noun meaning, not the verb meaning, so starting the article with 'Die as a verb means ... ' misleads the reader about what the article is going to be about. A better alternative is the hatnote which I introduced in this revision, which first gives the actual topic of the article before giving the possible alternative as a clarification. Why do you think the current situation is preferable to the use of the hatnote? Markelele (talk) 20:18, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I think think the current state is just fine and is preferable as it complies with disambiguation and hatnote guidelines. older ≠ wiser 22:58, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

AR-15 redirect

Where has the redirect for AR-15 been "much discussed"? Not on the talk page for the redirect. (Hohum ^@) 11:22, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Actually, the talk page of the redirect has a pointer to the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 24#AR-15. It has also come up several times in requested move discussions at Talk:AR-15 (disambiguation). older ≠ wiser 11:28, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I should have read the notice more carefully. (Hohum ^@) 11:46, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

From the editor: If only if

Op-ed: The last leg of the Admin Ship's current cruise

Opinion: Wrestling with Wikipedia reality

News and notes: Another newspaper for Wikipedia; Wikimania 2018 ends; changes at NPR

In the media: Blackouts in Europe; Wikipedia and capitalists; WMF Jet Set

Discussion report: Wikipedias take action against EU copyright proposal, plus new user right proposals

Featured content: Wikipedia's best content in images and prose

Arbitration report: Status quo processes retained in two disputes

Traffic report: Soccer, football, call it what you like – that and summer movies leave room for little else

Technology report: New bots, new prefs

Gallery: Independence days, national holidays, and football – all in July

Blog: Motivation of two editors

Recent research: Different Wikipedias use different images; editing contests more successful than edit-a-thons

Humour: It's all the same

Essay: Wikipedia does not need you

From the archives: The pending changes fiasco: how an attempt to answer one question turned into a quagmire

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For having the greatest signature in the history of Wikipedia! Finally, somebody else who gets it! Older definitely does NOT equal wiser! LadnavIkiw (talk) 02:53, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

DASD

This page couldn't be moved, as "DASD (disambiguation)" already exists as a redirect to "DASD". The cut-and-paste seemed appropriate since there was no real history on either page. Peter Flass (talk) 00:39, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

There's 16 years of edit history at DASD. WP:RM provides forum to request moves you can't do yourself. older ≠ wiser 00:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, once the original disambiguation page was gone the move went fine. Peter Flass (talk) 01:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

BFA

What is your reasoning for consistently removing the link to World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth from the BFA Disambiguation page? The DABMENTION you cited doesn't make sense. Its example is for when you're linking to a subpage of another page, but I'm not. Battle for Azeroth has a distinct page. Spellingbee91 (talk) 04:24, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Neither article has any indication that the game is commonly known by those initials. Disambiguation pages are not a collection of things that happen to have some initials. The linked article must support the claimed usage. older ≠ wiser 11:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

It has to be referred to as such on Wikipedia specifically? What policy cites that? It's on other wikis, for instance, the WoW Gamepedia External Link cited at the bottom of Battle for Azeroth explicitly calls it BFA in the first sentence. WoWWiki, a similar wiki, named its portal BfA. (Also, a lot of people on Facebook are calling it that which is what prompted this edit, because I was confused what BFA was but Wikipedia didn't have the applicable detail yet, so I had fixed that.) --Spellingbee91 (talk) 15:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages#Acronyms, initialisms, and abbreviations. older ≠ wiser 23:18, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Ahhh you cited the wrong policy when removing it. That's a silly policy though, there's literally nothing preventing editing the linked page to list its acronym and then editing the disambiguation page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spellingbee91 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 23 August 2018 (UTC)