On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Carcharothcarcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:24 PM, David Gerarddgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/19 Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com:
Does anyone else get annoyed by certain hatlinks? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankton When I go to look something up on plankton (a core encyclopedic article if ever there was one), do I really want to have to read: "For the SpongeBob character, see List of characters in SpongeBob SquarePants#Plankton"?
This is almost a FAQ on this list :-) The usual cure is a two-item disambig page. For an example, see what I just did to [[Plankton]].
Thanks.
I feel informed now I know about:
*Plankton Man *Electroplankton *United Plankton Pictures
Purist dabbers will dispute some of those entries, but I think dab pages should be informative, as well as referring purely to things that might conceivably be searched for or linked to as "plankton".
Hey, you missed out:
*Plankton! - episode 3b(7) of SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1)
I am impressed, though, that we have this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_the_plankton
And *three* articles on plankton surveys. Not stubs either. Really rather nice articles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Plankton_Recorder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Continuous_Plankton_Recorder_Survey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCAR_Southern_Ocean_Continuous_Plankton_Recorde...
Ooh, look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diel_vertical_migration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_layers_(oceanography)
I hope the SpongeBob SquarePants fans that went looking for information on their favorite characters are reading these articles! :-)
Carcharoth
PS. And people wonder why there is debate over articles on fiction?