On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:57:01 -0000, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
Zoney wrote
I hereby propose that instead of using the
heading "See also" at the
end of articles, we use the title "Related articles".
As far as I'm concerned, these mean different things. 'See also' can
include non-related articles with names that are closely related, for
example [[Gilbert O'Sullivan]] in an article on [[Gilbert and Sullivan]].
I think 'See also' is fine; I'm sure most people just treat it as advisory.
Charles
Ah, but you see, that's exactly the kind of thing that would be nice
to stop (in my opinion). If for example, [[Gilbert O'Sullivan]] is
likely to be confused with [[Gilbert and Sullivan]] (and I'm not
certain about that, but yes, there are other plausible examples), it
should surely be treated as disambiguation, not lumped in with a list
of *related* articles. "See also" is too much of a "catch all" title.
Zoney
--
~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...