Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation/Archive 54

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 50←Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54

Need more eyes please

Can some of you experts please have a look at National bank (disambiguation) and see if you think it's okay the way it is? If you look at the history, it's been through many iterations recently with Boubloub making changes that kept converting it into an article or list, and then me trying to revert the worst to bring it in line with DAB MOS. Clearly there are a LOT of banks with the term in its title, so wondering if they should all be there, or is there a better solution? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

For a start, there's currently a WP:MALPLACED problem. Narky Blert (talk) 22:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Pag

An article that you have been involved in editing—Pag—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

WT:WikiProject Disambiguation/Archive 53#Lists of Indian films - a heads-up (contd.)

JBW has kindly given 2A00:23C8:9FB7:5C00:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log) a 3-month holiday; see diff. If you come across new instances of this nuisance, feel free to post on my TP; and if there's enough of a pattern I'll assemble another depthcharge. Narky Blert (talk) 21:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

That's welcome news. If they return, one option is to request an edit filter to prevent unconfirmed editors from replacing "Foo (qualifier)|Foo" by "Foo" in links from "List of Hindi films of yyyy", or perhaps with slightly broader scope. Most of their contributions include differences following that pattern, their final effort including several changes such as replacing Footpath (1953 film)|Footpath by the less relevant Footpath. Certes (talk) 00:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
That's an excellent idea. I can envisage a filter which could be precise and straightforward. If I collect a couple of new throwaway IPs, I'll file a request. Narky Blert (talk) 14:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
This page shows IP edits to Indian films by year within the last 30 days. Most are good-faith improvements, but most edits with significant negative size changes e.g. (–123) are likely to be of interest. The damage was extensive, but everything seems to have been reverted. I suspect that an enthusiastic editor has their own "master copy" of each page offline. From time to time they make a minor improvement to one and upload it to Wikipedia, overwriting everyone else's edits since their last upload. Certes (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
My test would be for Hindi films of xxxx/IP/negative size/links to DAB and/or name pages. A Mk 1 eyeball scan of your list suggests that would catch everything with no false positives (and everything like that had already been reverted). I'm not so sure about working off-wiki; I've earlier seen a couple of instances where they returned immediately after a big edit to introduce an error they'd overlooked. Narky Blert (talk) 08:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
A couple of edits today fit the pattern but appear to be good-faith and plausibly correct: [1], [2] Certes (talk) 22:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't look like them. This IP edits elsewhere too, and note the ES in your first diff. Narky Blert (talk) 12:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
It's almost certainly a different person, a constructive editor, but might trigger a hypothetical edit filter if we're not careful. Certes (talk) 14:35, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Dabs for creation

Editors who watch this page may be interested in Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Articles for Creation/Disambiguations. Certes (talk) 08:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Cydonia

needs moving to Cydonia (disambiguation) by someone with the right access. The region of Mars is now the clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should hatnote to the dab page. The ancient Greek city and genus should be handled more prominently as the next two most likely things readers would be looking for but that's less of an issue. — LlywelynII 05:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@LlywelynII: You can make technical move requests at WP:RMTR, if you believe it's uncontroversial. Otherwise, start a regular WP:RM. Incidentally, it seems premature to have reorganized the dab page before any such moves. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 06:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
The primary topics are the primary topics, regardless of where the page is (mis)parked. Cf. MOS:DABORDER.
WP:RMTR is just a clearinghouse for the requests. If any of the admins able to do the work there are keeping an eye on dabs at all, they'd notice this here and either handle it or point out any issue. Random admins there might not be as clear on dab policy minutiae that might impact this. (Ditto nonadmins watching this page who might have an opinion on the rearrangement.) — LlywelynII 06:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
@LlywelynII I agree that WP:RM is the way to request this move, but I don't agree that Mars is clearly the PT. The statistics from Wikinav appear to show that when people land on the disambiguation page Cydonia they are more likely to move to Kydonia than to Cydonia (Mars), and there is certainly not an overwhelming majority looking for the Mars location. PamD 21:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Clearly is per Google but if our stats are different for our readers, then sure. I'll just move the pair to the top of the page and leave it where it is. Stuff like this is why I wasn't looking for a procedural rubber stamp. — LlywelynII 00:26, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

RDAB speedy criteria

See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#RFC new R5 for a proposal to make RDAB errors a speedy criteria. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Mike Hall#Requested move 6 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mike Hall#Requested move 6 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 10:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Move Kritika (disambiguation) to Kritika

There is a discussion here about whether to move Kritika (disambiguation) to Kritika. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Program

Are you still operating the program, new students 2600:1004:B265:3A2:C015:335A:4A53:9CE (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

There is no specific program for disambiguation, but you may be interested in Wikipedia:Education program. Certes (talk) 19:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Is a surname a primary topic if it has a qualifier?

?I have been creating some name pages carved out of DAB pages on and off for some time, and it suddenly occurred to me that perhaps the name should be a primary topic in this case Lerner - only I have created it with a disambiguator, as it is primarily a surname from which the other topics arise... Which rule applies here Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

What matters is whether there is a primary topic for the string "Lerner", i.e. are people using that string primarily looking for any one thing? My first impression is no - googling for "Lerner" -Wikipedia the first three pages of results are about 50/50 people with the surname (Ben Lerner most commonly, but far from exclusively) and other uses. To me this suggests that the disambiguation being primary is best.
There is no general rule though as what the primary topic is can only be determined based at the level of the individual topic. Thryduulf (talk) 10:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, [3] is a technically correct application of WP:NAMELIST, but the problem is that the said guideline isn't necessarily well thought out. Its application happens to force the concept of strict separation of disambiguation and set indices - which we as a community expressed a lot of ambivalence about in a recent RFC at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment/Archive 9#Request for comment, as navigation outcomes for readers aren't necessarily improved by doing that.
The practical result of these changes is that we might now have ended up promoting a bunch of topics that happen to be called that way but are less well associated with the term by the average reader - compared to the surname.
One way to try to measure these things is to compare clickstreams from before and after the change. I have the following clickstream archives downloaded so here goes:
clickstream-enwiki-2020-11.tsv:
  • Lerner Lerner_Enterprises link 14
  • total: 14 to 1 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2022-05.tsv:
  • Lerner Lerner_Enterprises link 14
  • total: 14 to 1 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2023-08.tsv:
  • total: to 0 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2023-09.tsv:
  • Lerner Al_Lerner link 13
  • total: 13 to 1 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2023-10.tsv:
  • Lerner Aaron_B._Lerner link 10
  • Lerner Abba_P._Lerner link 12
  • total: 22 to 2 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2023-11.tsv:
  • Lerner Al_Lerner link 10
  • Lerner Alan_Jay_Lerner link 10
  • Lerner Lerner_Enterprises link 12
  • total: 32 to 3 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2023-12.tsv:
  • Lerner Michael_Lerner link 11
  • Lerner Lerner_Enterprises link 11
  • total: 22 to 2 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2024-01.tsv:
  • Lerner Lerner_Enterprises link 11
  • total: 11 to 1 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2024-02.tsv:
  • Lerner Theodor_Lerner link 16
  • Lerner Lerner_Enterprises link 16
  • total: 32 to 2 identified destinations
clickstream-enwiki-2024-03.tsv:
  • Lerner Abba_P._Lerner link 10
  • Lerner Al_Lerner link 10
  • total: 20 to 2 identified destinations
Generally, it's hard to tell much because all of these numbers are close to the anonymization threshold (<10 per source-destination pair).
So the Enterprises are a topic of interest from before which now gets more visibility, which could be good. But the other three companies might be getting promoted, while these people are getting demoted, and this could be bad.
At the same time, we clearly see that alphabetical sorting has had an effect on navigation outcomes. It's not at all clear whether that was good or bad.
--Joy (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
@Joy, Here and elsewhere you present copious amounts of data, but to be honest, it is presented in a way that is completely opaque to me as to what it signifies. older ≠ wiser 13:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
@Bkonrad apologies, I often forget to link the introductory materials and explain well.
The description of this data format would be at meta:Research:Wikipedia clickstream. Long story short, the system to analyze the records where the readers visited allows us to see how many visits happened between two pairs of pages; we can use that system to figure out patterns of reader navigation.
The system is organized in monthly batches, so we see the sum of what happened each month. The visualization of the most recent month is at https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Lerner but for older months, there's no visualization at this point. So we have to reach for the raw data, by downloading the files and finding what we want inside them. That's what I do - I do a search of the monthly data files that I downloaded for all instances of "Lerner", for example.
About the individual line format - if e.g. we have one that says:
Lerner Theodor_Lerner link 16
that means there were 16 observed cases where a reader was at Lerner, and afterwards they navigated to Theodor Lerner.
We also see the keyword "link", which indicates there was a link being followed - otherwise it could say "other", which would mean the reader e.g. reached for the search box or something.
Now, the significant limitations to these statistics in this case exist because if there had been 9 observed cases where a reader was at Lerner, and afterwards they navigated to e.g. Main Page, this wouldn't show up - to protect reader privacy, all such cases where there were <10 cases the analysis are omitted.
Please let me know if this suffices to explain, or should I clarify further. --Joy (talk) 13:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Brains trust needed on this one please

I have posted this in the Australian Wikipedians project as well, but it has occurred to me that perhaps it should perhaps be a DAB, or there should be a separate DAB, and it would be good to have some input from DAB experts. See Talk:Adelaide University. There are lots of incoming links, plus a host of articles on things (mostly clubs) affiliated with the university beginning with "Adelaide University" rather than "University of Adelaide". I'm not sure which is the best way to go here. If the current one is converted into a DAB, it would still mean changing all the incoming links. And in the transition period, there's bound to be a lot of confusion. I don't know when the actual merger and new name will be finalised - I suspect that it will drag on beyond 2026, as it's already taken so long to get to this point. It will be a new entity, and I have no idea whether the clubs, union, etc. will retain their current names. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

What is the primary topic for "Adelaide University" – the existing University of Adelaide, the proposed combined institution, or none of the above? Certes (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Well it's difficult to know what it would be in the future, but at the moment I'd say its the University of Adelaide, as it's used interchangeably. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 12:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Then at the moment we should probably restore Adelaide University as a primary redirect to its current primary topic University of Adelaide, after moving the new article to Adelaide University (some qualifier goes here). We should then revisit the titles if and when the existing institution ceases to be a primary topic for "Adelaide University". Certes (talk) 12:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Okay, thanks very much for the advice. I may not get to it for a couple of days as I'm going away, but I think that this sounds sensible. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 13:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I know the links are wrong but it may be wise to wait a day or two in case someone replies with a better idea. Certes (talk) 13:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Okay. I'll be away anyway. 😊 Laterthanyouthink (talk) 14:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I haven't done anything about this yet, but thinking about creating the new Adelaide University with a date in parentheses for now, and pushing the decision down the line. The thing is, which date? It was officially created in legislation this year, but won't be operational until at least 2026 (see here), and I suspect that there will be delays. I'd better copy this comment there too. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
You could raise a RM for the new university and see what new names are suggested. It would need to show clearly that the old university is still the primary topic for "Adelaide University" for now and should revert to being a WP:primary redirect, Certes (talk) 08:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Done. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Robert Carroll / Bob Carroll

Would it be appropriate to merge the Robert Carroll and Bob Carroll disambiguation pages?

There is at least one entry (Bobby Carroll) perhaps legitimately on both; and a couple others (Robert L. Carroll, Robert Todd Carroll) on both that perhaps should be only on one.

By way of comparison, James Lovell (disambiguation) includes both Jims and Jameses; Michael Collins includes Michaels, Mikes, and Micks. Sticking within the Robert/Bob world, Robert Blake and Robert Green (disambiguation) lump Roberts, Bobs, Robbies and Robs together; but on the other hand, Robert Hill and Bobby Hill are distinct DAB pages. TJRC (talk) 22:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I would leave them as they are. Although all the Bobs are named Robert (possibly excepting the actor/singer), it seems more likely they would be sought by readers under Bob and would therefore be easier to find on a dab page devoted to Bobs. Robert L. Carroll and Robert Todd Carroll were both sometimes also known as Bob, so should be on both pages. Bobby Carroll is an unambiguous title with no evidence he was called Bob, so should probably just be a See Also on each page. I don't think there's any strong consensus about one way or the other, though. Station1 (talk) 01:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree with the "sought by readers under Bob" bit, but the merged-from page would be a redirect to the merged-to page, so those doing the seeking would land on the appropriate page in any event. Not arguing for the merge, just giving my line of thinking. TJRC (talk) 01:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
True, they would land on the appropriate page, but my thinking is that it's slightly easier to peruse the four Bobs in a row on the Bob Carroll page than 11 mixed Bobs, Roberts and Bobby on a merged page. The difference is very minor in cases with a moderate number of names, like this, so I don't think it makes a great deal of difference, but it might in longer lists. Station1 (talk) 02:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I'll leave it be, then. Thanks for the discussion. TJRC (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Searching for "Blagger" currently redirects to a page with no mention of the word.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Blagger&redirect=no seems weird that it doesn't link or disambig to Blagger (video game). Not sure how to mark a page for "Disambig page needed". Oathed (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

"Blagging" refers to a social engineering technique ([4]), and at the time the redirect was placed, that was reflected in the Social engineering (security) article.
My own view is that Blagger (video game) should be moved to Blagger (there appears to be no other article called "Blagger", so the disambiguation parenthetical is not needed), optionally with a {{about}} hatnote along the lines of {{about||the social engineering technique|Social engineering (security)}} (assuming the "blagging" information is added to that article, which seems appropriate). TJRC (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
@TJRC while you were writing that comment, I've nominated the redirect for discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 18#Blagger. I agree the video game seems the primary topic.
@Oathed in general if you think a redirect should be replaced by a disambiguation page, you can just overwrite the redirect with the disambiguation page. If you aren't sure or aren't able to do that yourself for some reason then the best thing to do is to nominate the redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. If no page exists and you don't want to/aren't able to create one yourself you can request a disambig at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Thryduulf (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Model hatnote

A third opinion would be appreciated at Talk:Model#Hatnote. Certes (talk) 21:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

A fourth opinion would be useful too! A tenacious editor has a firm opinion on why our normal hatnote practices should not apply to that article. If they're right then I'd appreciate someone explaining the reasons more clearly. Certes (talk) 12:19, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

What to do about this one?

Aliu is a DAB, but (after considerable work finding all of those people!) find that it only seems to be used as a name, and in its capitalised form as an acronym. I was going to go ahead and create a name set index page, but then realised that would only leave those two entries, distinguished by case only. Is there any kind of rule about what to do in this instance? Or, alternatively, what would you prefer to see? Or just let it be and forget about it? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

My first thought is make Aliu the name set index and use a hatnote to link to the acronym usage. Redirect ALIU to the expansion of the acronym and add a hatnote to the name page from there. Thryduulf (talk) 10:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Actually seeing ALIU was red, I've created it as a redirect to Art Looting Investigation Unit and added the hatnote, although the wording of the latter could probably be improved. Thryduulf (talk) 10:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
@Thryduulf Looks good. I was thinking on the same lines. PamD 11:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Though the target article of ALIU needed a bit of attention! Had a ludicrously long "short" description, and the lead gave no clue which country had set it up. Now tweaked. PamD 11:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, Thryduulf and PamD. I think I'd better remove the capitalised version and convert the DAB page into a set index one now. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Oh, it was already, but I just moved the ALIU into See alsos and changed the wording at the top to read that Aliu is a name. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Move 'Pratapsingh'?

i guess Pratapsingh page could be moved to Pratap Singh. becuase Pratap is First Nameand Singh is Middle or Last Name. there should be a space between these two (?) KuldeepBurjBhalaike (Talk) 03:59, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

It looks as if we have duplicate dab pages Pratapsingh and Pratap Singh. I don't know which title is more appropriate. PamD 04:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
I have now redirected Pratapsingh to Pratap Singh, which has much higher pageviews, removed duplicate entries, added missing dates, and sorted the list into chronological order as more likely to help the reader where there are so many variations of spelling/spacing. PamD 09:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Small form factor (desktop and motherboard)#Requested move 3 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Small form factor (desktop and motherboard)#Requested move 3 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —Alalch E. 11:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Madonna#Requested move 1 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Madonna#Requested move 1 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Dawid2009 (talk) 15:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Konkani (disambiguation)#Requested move 5 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Konkani (disambiguation)#Requested move 5 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Radość (disambiguation)#Requested move 4 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Radość (disambiguation)#Requested move 4 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 16:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Imperial University

I have been reverted repeatedly on dab Imperial University and would welcome a third opinion as to how MOS:DABONEBLUE applies there. Certes (talk) 15:32, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

For Japan, I would list only Imperial Universities and the University of Tokyo (which, as the first imperial university in Japan, was originally given that name). The others are WP:PTM. Dekimasuよ! 00:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Saint Sophia Cathedral

Hi folks- Right now, Saint Sophia Cathedral is a disambiguation page, but Saint Sophia Cathedral (disambiguation) redirects to List of churches dedicated to Holy Wisdom (which is a list, not a dab page). I think it should instead redirect to the dab page? It looks like Saint Sophia Cathedral was itself a redirect to List of churches dedicated to Holy Wisdom up until May of this year, but was (re)made into a dab page without bringing along the Saint Sophia Cathedral (disambiguation) redirect? I think that probably the "...(disambiguation)" redirect should just be updated, but I wanted to check here because this seemed like a kind of complicated situation. Thanks for any assistance! Cleancutkid (talk) 03:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I've retargetted it. If there is a disambiguation page at X then X (disambiguation) should redirect there. Thryduulf (talk) 07:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
There's also interestingly a dab page Saint Sophia Church which probably ought to be merged with List of churches dedicated to Holy Wisdom. Some of them may indeed be dedicated not to "holy wisdom" but to Sophia of Rome, but the churches listed in her article include Santa Sofia, Naples which is in the "List of..." but not the dab page, so I don't think there is any meaningful distinction, and they should all be bundled into the list as is usual for church dab pages where "Church of x" and "X church" are brought together, with all their variations of St/St./Saint and often with the international spellings of the saint's name (see St._Andrew's_Church#Italy). On the other hand, that list isn't formatted as a standard church name dab. I'm sure there's a churches enthusiast around here who will sort this lot out! PamD 08:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
And Sophienkirche (disambiguation) might go into the mix. PamD 08:26, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the retargetting, @Thryduulf!
Yes, there are a number of different semi-overlapping pages, which I know that I found confusing to navigate when I was trying to sort out the links, and I think readers might find tough, too. I think there are 5 dab pages:
plus two lists:
Cleancutkid (talk) 05:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
please note that Saint Sophia refers not only to Holy Wisdom but also to a number of saints. In my opinions mix all together is not useful for the navigation and the page List of churches dedicated to Holy Wisdom is not clear. MrKeefeJohn (talk) 08:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
I beg to differ: most readers looking for information about a church named after Saint Sophia will not know whether the edifice is dedicated to Holy Wisdom or to one of the saints named Sophia, and merging all the church dab pages would make it easier to find what they are looking for. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
@MrKeefeJohn, I agree that List of churches dedicated to Holy Wisdom is not useful/clear as it was/is, so I appreciate that you separated out the Saint Sophia Cathedral dab page. I don't think that everything should be thrown onto one super-long page, but that there should be some intentional thought put into what churches show up on what lists/dab pages (and making sure that things link to each other, which was sometimes not the case).
I don't have much experience with figuring out what the scope of dab pages like this should be (why I brought it up here), but ideally they can work well for both future readers (who, as @Rosbif73 mentioned, may not know who/what the church was dedicated to) and future editors to keep the pages making sense. Cleancutkid (talk) 05:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Add Santa Sofia to the mix - includes the Italian churches, whether they're dedicated to saint or to wisdom! PamD 14:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
And although Church of God's Holy Wisdom was an alternative name already bolded in the text of Hagia Sophia, there was no redirect from that term until I created it a few minutes ago, pointing to that article and relying on the hatnote there to lead the reader to an appropriate dab page for any other similarly-named church. Ouch. PamD 15:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
There's also a List of churches in Sofia, Bulgaria – most of which are dedicated to other saints, but which could be possible targets for "Sophia church". FWIW I've added this to the Sofia Church (disambiguation) § See also. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Big O

Notcharliechaplin (talk · contribs) has reverted three times the removal of a piped link to a page that does not mention the dab title on Big O (disambiguation). Additional opinions from editors familiar with our disambiguation guidelines would be helpful. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ray Brown (Negro leagues pitcher)#Requested move 17 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ray Brown (Negro leagues pitcher)#Requested move 17 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. It concerns WP:INCDAB / WP:PDAB. --BX (talk) 20:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Jutish#Requested move 18 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Jutish#Requested move 18 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 12:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Come On Down (disambiguation)#Requested move 18 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Come On Down (disambiguation)#Requested move 18 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 11:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Name of DAB for Ballantyne

I think that Ballantyne needs to have a DAB and separate name page... should the current one become a surname page and the others go into a new DAB called Ballantyne (disambiguation), or the names go into a surname page titled Ballantyne (name)/(surname)? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Generally, I dont think standalone name pages meet WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. —Bagumba (talk) 09:33, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Bagumba. So do you mean make Ballantyne the DAB, and create Ballantyne (name) as a set index page? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
@Laterthanyouthink: Per WP:APOTITLE, make it Ballantyne (surname). Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 07:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. Done (although it took me twice as long as it should because I managed to wipe out basically the whole article part after completion, by mistake!). Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Fourth of July (disambiguation)#Requested move 4 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fourth of July (disambiguation)#Requested move 4 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPathtalk 08:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways § Disambiguation hatnotes

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways § Disambiguation hatnotes, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Thryduulf (talk) 10:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC) Thryduulf (talk) 10:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:LGBT in the United States (disambiguation)#Requested move 19 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:LGBT in the United States (disambiguation)#Requested move 19 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --MikutoH talk! 00:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

A question about music single titles

Hi, everyone. Am I wrong here? Because consistency wise for songs released as singles, every other DAB page I've looked at lists the release year of the single, and not the associated album. QuestFour (talk) 07:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

QuestFour, this is probably not the best venue for questions about titles of music singles. Have you tried WT:WikiProject Music? I'm sure they can help. Mathglot (talk) 03:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi folks- I don't know if this is the right place for this, but I got great help here for my previous query on the St Sophia stuff, so I figured I'd try again (I'm not quite sure of the distinction between this talk page and Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation).

京 is the Han character meaning "capital", and is also a disambiguation page, 京, since the character shows up in a number of city names. In the "See Also" at the bottom, there are a few further related topics. One of these links is to 西京, which is itself a redirect to the disambiguation page Western Capital. Right now, the link shows up as a "bad" link to a disambiguation page.

The usual way to make it clear that something is an intentional dab link is to append a "(disambiguation)" to it. However, since 西京 is a redirect, not a disambiguation page in itself, that would not seem to work? (or at least the new redirect 西京 (disambiguation) would need to be created). I guess that we could just link Western Capital (disambiguation) directly, but I like the symmetry of linking the characters (as in 東京 (disambiguation), another entry in the see also), to make it clear why it is being listed. The characters could be listed after the link, though? Or is this a case that could be an exception to piping links on a dab page?

Thanks for any assistance/contributions! Cleancutkid (talk) 22:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Just make the redirect 西京 (disambiguation). —swpbT • beyond • mutual 14:38, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 Done. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks @BD2412, @swpb - that felt like the best approach to me, but I'm still new enough to this that I wanted to double-check. Cleancutkid (talk) 18:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review of Beuys (disambiguation)

There is a deletion review discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Beuys (disambiguation) that may be of interest to members of this project. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Galaxy 2 (disambiguation)#Requested move 14 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Galaxy 2 (disambiguation)#Requested move 14 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Whether a page with sentences and refs could be a dab

Please see Talk:Hormone therapy#Organization. There is a question about whether Hormone therapy "looks much more like a DAB". WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Creating a primary disambiguation page for Hey, Rookie

There is a page for the film Hey, Rookie however even tho mentioned on that page that the film was based on a WW2 GI stage review, there is no page for the original Hey, Rookie show, (most often referred to as just Hey Rookie due to its most prominent continued usage being as a adjectival phrase for the name of the swimming pool in San Pedro the cast financed). I am an interested party in that my father was one of the stars of the show. I came upon this issue when I discovered that someone had made a page for him where I wanted to add a Hey, Rookie reference given that it was his first acting experience which lead him to an acting career.

Hey Rookie had a unique and fascinating history, and given that its success resulted in the later film production, I believe that: Hey, Rookie (stage play) should be created and be the primary disambiguation page with the film's page renamed: Hey, Rookie (film). My family donated all the press and material my father collected about the show to the Fort MacArthur Museum's archive which has displays and some unpublished monographs on the subject.

I plan to create a Hey, Rookie (stage play) page When I gain access to the references in a way that I can properly cite and would like some direction on how to manage this disambiguation process.Nesdon (talk) 17:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The first thing to do is to write the article (Hey Rookie (play) may be the better title but I'm not familiar with the naming conventions in that topic area and Hey Rookie (stage play) isn't wrong). Once that's done you can create Hey Rookie (disambiguation) and request that it be moved to the base title. Thryduulf (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Great Lakes (disambiguation)#Requested move 26 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Great Lakes (disambiguation)#Requested move 26 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vpab15 (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Jean Kelly (disambiguation)#Requested move 22 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Jean Kelly (disambiguation)#Requested move 22 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans 02:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Luxon#Requested move 22 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Luxon#Requested move 22 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 21:27, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

RM at Talk:List of Coronation Street characters (1960)#Requested move 15 August 2024.

I have initiated an RM at Talk:List of Coronation Street characters (1960)#Requested move 15 August 2024, to move 305 articles on characters introduced to TV shows by year away from their current parenthetical titles. Although the primary rationale for these moves is that the titles are deceptive because they do not indicate that the lists are restricted to characters introduced in those years, they are also of interest to this project because the titles currently use parentheticals for a non-disambiguating purpose. BD2412 T 20:18, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Makar (disambiguation)#Requested move 5 August 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Makar (disambiguation)#Requested move 5 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 06:16, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Mex#Requested move 19 August 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mex#Requested move 19 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Yovt (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move of John Jefferson

There is a disputed requested move discussion at Talk:John Jefferson#Requested move 20 August 2024 that is probably trivially resolvable by someone more familiar with disambiguation-related policies. Daask (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Merging dab pages (The Void into Void)

Talk:Void#Merge from The Void. older ≠ wiser 10:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Lady Macbeth (disambiguation) has a "See also" section which just contains links to Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District (novel) and some of the works based on it. These include a 2016 film entitled "Lady Macbeth".

This is only a short disambiguation page (11 links, not counting {{wikt}} and {{disambiguation}} templates), and the "See also" section was created before the 2016 film was added to the page.

Should the 2016 film be in the main section of the page? And should the other links related to the novella be there? Thanks. Aoeuidhtns (talk) 16:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The film should be included in the main listing. The others, unless there are indications of being known as simply "Lady Macbeth" don't need to be repeated here. Only the link to the Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District disambiguation page is needed in see also. older ≠ wiser 17:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
The guideline WP:PARTIAL covers partial title mathches. —Bagumba (talk) 18:02, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks both. That makes it a lot clearer. Aoeuidhtns (talk) 23:18, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

VOTD

Hello, I don't really even go here & I'm fairly new to Wikipedia so there's a lot to learn, but I came across this disambiguation page that is... kind of bizarre? It's not titled as a disambiguation thing which is one thing, but the page itself seems to be entirely pointless? It's assigning acronyms to television episodes that, as far as I can find, don't even go by those acronyms? I'm part of the Doctor Who community on here and I have actually never heard any of the three DW episodes mentioned be referred to as "VOTD" ever. According to the page statistics, there have been 874 viewers since it was created in 2010.

I just don't know what to tag or how to handle this sort of thing or where else to put it. I appreciate it, thanks! Garriefisher (talk) 02:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I see two DW episodes there, not three. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
A relevant guideline is MOS:DABACRO:

... it is important that each individual entry is referred to by its respective abbreviation within its article ... if an abbreviation is verifiable, but not mentioned in the target article, consider adding it to the target article

—Bagumba (talk) 08:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
It's not titled as a disambiguation thing Per MOS:DABPAGENAME, (disambiguation) is not needed if there is no primary topic for the term.—Bagumba (talk) 08:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

What is the rule here?

I got alerted to this change, to an entry in the Japanese wiki. It doesn't seem to be particularly helpful, but I can't seem to find a specific rule for this kind of entry. Can someone let me know yay or nay, and point me to a rule, please? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

A general guideline is MOS:INTERLINK:

... {{Interlanguage link}} template may be helpful to show a red link accompanied by an interlanguage link if no article exists in English Wikipedia.

—Bagumba (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Ah yes, I have seen those and used them in articles myself, thank you. But can they be used without a blue link to the English wiki in an entry on a DAB page? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:34, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Oh, it appears that WP:DABSISTER is a recent addition:

If the article to be disambiguated does not have an article on the English Wikipedia, but has an article on a sister project in another language, the term may be linked to the sister project using the {{interlanguage link}} template ... Use of the {{interlanguage link}} template is not a substitute for the need to have a red link from an existing article for the disambiguating term (per MOS:DABRED) ...

The latter portion suggests that another page (not just the dab) would need to have a red link to the Japanese group —Bagumba (talk) 05:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Oh - thank you for that. I will get back to it and check later. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Sexual disorder#Requested move 30 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sexual disorder#Requested move 30 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Web-julio (talk) 03:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Wild Wing (disambiguation)#Requested move 26 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wild Wing (disambiguation)#Requested move 26 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Public Service Announcement (disambiguation)#Requested move 27 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Public Service Announcement (disambiguation)#Requested move 27 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 18:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:LGBT history in Georgia#Proposed merge of LGBT rights in Georgia into LGBT history in Georgia

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:LGBT history in Georgia#Proposed merge of LGBT rights in Georgia into LGBT history in Georgia that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. --MikutoH talk! 01:54, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

All caps

Regi vs REGI. Is having two separate dabs be justified in this case? Web-julio (talk) 19:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Given there are just 7 entries and three see also (excluding those to each other) between the two pages, I would be in favour of merging. Probably to Regi as that's the longer of the two. Thryduulf (talk) 21:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Does this need a merging discussion in the talk pages? Web-julio (talk) 00:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
If you think it will be controversial, yes start a formal merge discussion. If you think it will be uncontroversial, no - just be bold and do it. A middle ground would be to just leave pointers on the talk page to this discussion and wait a few days to see what the response (if any) is. Personally, I'd wait until circa 24 hours after you asked the question here and then just do if there have been no objections as I'd be surprised if it was controversial at all. Thryduulf (talk) 01:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
I personally thought there was a policy on such cases. Because I don't know a another similar case alike. Web-julio (talk) 01:45, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
We have WP:DABCOMBINE which is a guideline that deals with capitalisation differences in the first bullet. It's worded more strongly than I remembered, but it basically says to combine topics that differ only in capitalisation unless the combined page would be "unreasonably long", giving Oe as an example of a combined dab page (that covers Oe, OE and various ligatures and variants with diacritics). "Unreasonably long" isn't defined, but a combined REGI/Regi dab will definitely not be. Thryduulf (talk) 01:55, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
I would think of it this way - how likely is it that the average reader distinguishes these two, can we see a separate pattern of traffic for each group?
If we merge, will this improve navigation for both groups or make it worse?
With 2+5=7 items total, it probably doesn't matter, but if a list grows, it becomes a concern. We recently mentioned something like this at WT:D#Capitalization of a disambiguation page title with both all-caps and lowercase senses where there were examples with 28 and 46 items. --Joy (talk) 07:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:EP#Requested move 22 October 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:EP#Requested move 22 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RachelTensions (talk) 13:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Train simulator (disambiguation)#Requested move 14 October 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Train simulator (disambiguation)#Requested move 14 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 03:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Primary topic?

I've just created NLMA as a DAB because it was redirecting to a rather obscure organisation, and its main use is clearly the National Live Music Awards. Just wondering if the latter should be a primary topic in this case, being an initialism? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:37, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

page views don't support that. If anything, views indicate the 'obscure' organization might just be the primary topic. older ≠ wiser 00:50, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
But that's because NMLA was redirecting to that page. The Australian music awards are nearly always referred to as the NLMAs, so many people would be searching on that term. (And if you search on the abbreviation or full name, you will see how many mentions there are on Wikipedia.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:17, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, but the total views for the awards are nowhere near that of the group. The initialism gets very little traffic. It is possible that the recent move has somehow totally screwed the results. We can see in another month or two if there is any change. older ≠ wiser 10:17, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Oh, that's weird. Google doesn't turn up much about that organisation, and their website seems rather out of date. Okay, thanks. I'll make a note to check out the stats again in a few weeks' time. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:30, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Previously NLMA led to National Liberation Movement of Ahwaz, and if the Australian awards were "clearly" the main use I'd expect to find a lot of readers navigating onwards from there to the National Live Music Awards. But the Wikinav data for September don't support this: there's no sign of any readers leaving the Movement page to go to the Awards. Nor to the Medical Association. It looks to me as if the Movement is probably the primary topic, so the redirect should continue to go there and the dab page be amended accordingly. Or just leave the dab page as is.
Just for interest, Googling "NLMA" from here in the UK I get hits for the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association coming top, with a few other organisations, he Aussie awards are on the third page, and I haven't yet found the Movement by the end of the 5th page.
Probably best leave the dab page as it now is. PamD 13:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Based solely on my google results for "NLMA" -Wikipedia (I'm also in the UK), the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association would be the clear primary topic. Down to page 8 I've not seen any results for the other two topics that were listed on the dab. I did see a couple of results for the Taiwanese National Land Management Agency that I've added to the dab page though.
I repeated the same search on Duck Duck Go on tor (the exit node geolocated to the Netherlands) and got similar results - the only one of the topics on the first four pages (longer than Google's pages) was the medical association, although the Northeast Late Model Alliance (about which we have only a single passing mention at Mike Goudie; I haven't investigated its notability) also got lots of results. Thryduulf (talk) 22:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Interesting - thanks, PamD and Thryduulf. I wouldn't expect the Australian awards to pop up in UK searches really - such a small population here that the hits would be relatively small on Google. I'm not sure exactly how that wikinav tool works, but if I searched for NMLA in the search box on the app and it showed the liberation movement, as it does for redirects, I wouldn't go there, but would try another search on the long name. Anyhow, if everyone is happy to leave as is for a month or so, I will return to it and have another look. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Population isn't the only factor (Australia: 27.5 million, Newfoundland and Labrador: 510,000) and Australia does come up in search results in the UK for other matters, e.g. the primary topic for "APRA" in my UK-based google searches is Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. Thryduulf (talk) 03:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)


DOJ

The US DOJ should be primary for both DOJ and DoJ. Thoughts? Music Air BB (talk) 20:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Just googling DOJ -Wikipedia did bring up the US department first, but more entries on the first page related to the Northern Ireland department, the second page also brought entries for the Indian and South African departments and page 3 introduced the California, Ontario and Western Australian departments so I'm not seeing evidence of a primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 21:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Over 85% of traffic to DOJ goes on to the US DOJ. older ≠ wiser 22:01, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
DoJ gets almost no hits,[5], but should probably point to the same place as DOJ for consistency and to enable deletion of the unnecessary hatnote on ministry of justice. - Station1 (talk) 04:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Child protection (disambiguation)

This seems to me to be a particularly bad example of something not being an actual disambiguation page, but I am at a loss for a solution. BD2412 T 22:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

It's functioning as an index to articles relevant to the topic of child protection that in most cases someone using the search term "child protection" might be looking for (putting aside for now any quibbles about specific inclusions/exclusions). That's definitely a valuable page to have even if it doesn't strictly fit the arbitrary rules about what can be called a "disambiguation page". Unless anyone can explain what actual (not theoretical) harm it's doing then leaving it as is seems like the best solution. Thryduulf (talk) 00:31, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
I agree that it is functioning as an index, and should therefore be at a title like Index of articles on governmental child protection efforts, or the like. These are not ambiguous topics sharing a name. BD2412 T 02:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
That title wouldn't be navigationally helpful. Web-julio (talk) 01:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
For navigability, we could just merge this list of national child protection agencies into Child protection, then. BD2412 T 13:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Compare and contrast :)

Our processes don't seem to result in a general consistency, despite that being one of the article title criteria. --Joy (talk) 09:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

The article title consistency criterium applies to pattern of similar article's with specific reference to topic-specific naming conventions on article titles. Seeking any sort of more general consistency on Wikipedia is a fool's errand. older ≠ wiser 10:13, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
That last part may well be true, but at least we have to try, because we are still maintaining a single global article namespace and readers are going to notice if it's messy. --Joy (talk) 11:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
e and readers are going to notice if it's messy -- ROFL. older ≠ wiser 14:39, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
I gather you think this is all inconsequential to readers? So, in turn, the editors who engage in these sorts of discussions do not represent the readers? Do you see where I'm going with this? :) --Joy (talk) 20:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
There are other things far more impactful for readers that have even less consistency. Talk away, but be realistic about coming to any sort of definitive conclusion. All of the examples you mention are of different types and making any sort of comparison between them will be very difficult to establish any sort of consensus around. older ≠ wiser 21:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation/Archive_54&oldid=1260396117"