I am becoming increasingly concerned over seeing seeing greater and greater
numbers of non-article disambiguation pages. The concept of having
disambiguation pages was started for perfectly valid reasons -- for roughly
well-known cities that have the same name, monarchs with the same names, or
for other things where precedence over which term should be at a
non-disambiguated title cannot be determined (such as Mercury).
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia but it is also a wiki - so we must name articles
to (hopefully naturally) differentiate terms that would otherwise have the
same name AND encourage spontaneous linking. Full disambiguation should ONLY
be used as a last resort (such as with Mercury - planet Mercury doesn't cut
it in the same way as [[biological virus]] because "planet" is not part of
the planet's name - but makes for a useful redirect). If we don't encourage
spontaneous linking wherever possible, the project will eventually be lost
because contributors will increasingly find it tedious to use pipes all the
time when linking to articles. Alleviating unnecessary tedium is why I killed
the subpages in the Star Wars and Star Trek articles - contributions to those
articles have since significantly increased now that pipes don't have to be
used to link every term.
All I am saying, is that full disambiguation which turns a page named
[[example]] into a non-article list with a disambiguation notice and links to
[[example (discipline 1)]], [[example (discipline 2)]], [[example (discipline
3)]] should only be used as a last resort when valid non-parenthetical
alternatives are not used at all and there is a <reasonable> ambiguity issue.
--maveric149
I don't speak lojban, I'm sorry. Could you translate that?
You Wrote:
>On Tuesday 02 July 2002 01:18, koyaanisqatsi(a)nupedia.com wrote:
>> I'm sorry. Not reading closely enough. Well, that's a copyright
>> violation, as is batman.bmp. "off with their heads". :-) I'd delete them
>> myself, except I changed my password and promptly forgot what I changed it
>> to--hence I'm no longer logged in & can't log in.
>
>.i mi vimcu le stedu ti .ijafu'inai mi troci
>
>mi'e pier.
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>0
I agree with the point that the Year in Review articles are "space
limited" in a sense, but I don't see what's wrong with Toby's
solution: let the articles grow until they get too big, then unload
the less important stuff to something like [[Books published in
1962]], of course linked to from [[1962]]. The most important books
could still stay on [[1962]].
We could now try to come up with some hard and fast rule as to
when a list in a year's article is too long and deserves its own page,
but we could also just leave that up to judgement calls, like anything
else really.
Robert mentions another problem: some fans will add entries to years'
pages, thus skewing their "importance". That's true, but it is a
problem throughout Wikipedia. Many topics are covered from a certain
angle, probably because that's the angle the original author liked
and/or understood best. The hope is that other authors will show up
over time and add other angles. We should expect the same to happen on
the years' pages.
Axel
I'm sorry. Not reading closely enough. Well, that's a copyright violation, as is batman.bmp. "off with their heads". :-) I'd delete them myself, except I changed my password and promptly forgot what I changed it to--hence I'm no longer logged in & can't log in.
cheers,
kq
You Wrote:
>On Tuesday 02 July 2002 00:51, koyaanisqatsi(a)nupedia.com wrote:
>> I don't see that file in log:uploads. --?
>
>As I said. You have to hit the upload files link to see it.
>
>phma
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>0
I don't see that file in log:uploads. --?
kq
You Wrote:
>A ...Batman.mp3 file appeared in uploads without anyone uploading it. Who
>uploaded it? Is it a delenda, or does it pertain to a Batman article?
>
>phma0
Yesterday was my 4 0 t h b i r t h d a y. [1] So what a pleasing
gift it was that K5 saw fit to publish to the Culture section a
tribute to Mortimer Adler that I wrote. It was based on edits I
made to Adler's 'pedia article!
Here's the intro the the article [2]. I'd love to hear from
'pedia list members in the K5 comments section.
Friday, June 28th marked the first anniversary of the passing
of Mortimer Adler, founder of the Great Books program, so it
is fitting to enter into a discussion about what should be on
a list of the absolute best books to read...and why. Then
there are the related questions, such as: why did Adler see
fit to declare a "canon" of great books in the first place?
[1] but I don't want search engines to reveal that fact. :-)
[2] http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/6/30/10131/1418
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
Asmar uploaded a photocopy of a letter in Arabic with the heading
"Al-`ahrab", with what I at firt was a date, but as it says "Almand 50,
1355", it can't be a date on any calendar I'm aware of. It is a list with
five numbered items, but as I don't know Arabic, I have no idea what they are.
If someone uploads something in Arabic to Wikipedia, what, besides delete it,
should I do?
phma