[Wikipedia-l] Disambiguation detector

[Ray Saintonge]

Erik Moeller wrote:

>It may be useful to be able to transclude such text segments  
>([[>Wikipedia:Disambiguation]] or something like this). However, I am also  
>thinking about having these segments be inserted as part of a general  
>category scheme, such as
>
>[[Category:Disambiguation page]]
>
>Where that page would list all pages in that category, with automatic  
>paging and sorting, and allow editors to define a standard block of text  
>that is added at the bottom of all pages of that category. So we could use  
>the same principle for
>
>[[Category:Stub]]
>
>or
>
>[[Category:Deletion]]
>
>To have texts like
>
>''This aricle is a [[Wikipedia:stub article|stub]]. Please see  
>[[:Category:Stub]] for a list of current stub articles.''
>
>or
>
>''This page has been marked for deletion. In order to debate its deletion,  
>please use the discussion page.''
>
Much of this seems compatible to a suggestion that I made several months 
ago:  To include a category box or boxes at the bottom of the edit page. 
 At the time I also spoke in terms of a specific category scheme, which 
some people felt would be just one more thing to learn before it could 
be used effectively.  Although I would still favour that scheme there is 
no reason why we can't (at least in the early stages of such an 
initiative) have multiple overlapping schemes.   A which-is-better 
debate about various possible schemes in the early stages could rapidly 
lead to accomplishing absolutely nothing.  If multiple schemes are 
allowed, usage and practice will over time determine what stays. 
 Disused schemes will die by atrophy.

Whether there are many boxes at the end of an article, or one box with 
comma delimited categories would make no difference to me.  Although I 
would appreciate an option being available for case sensitive searches.

When I discussed this before I raised the possibility of an "XXX" 
classification for possibly objectionable material.  Some responses at 
the time felt that this was tantamount to applying censorship.  From my 
perspective any censorship would only be applied at the home computer 
level, and would give a parent the opportunity to block articles with 
certain codes from being viewed by their children.  Providing this sort 
of opportunity would at least give the public some confidence that we 
are aware of the problems.

Erik's suggestion of categories to detect stubs or to mark an article 
for deletion could fit in very well.  A simple search of category boxes 
for the word stub could instantly creat a list of these.

As the project gets bigger indexing will become more problematical. 
 Brute searches of the data base are not always the most satifactory.  A 
biography of a famous person will most often not include the word 
"biography" to be used as a search element.  Having an [[Index of ...]] 
or [[List of ...]] article does not guarantee that everything that could 
go on that list does go on it.  

In Wiktionary we have seen a proliferation of index pages for multiple 
languages.  I've had doubts from the beginning about whether this 
approach would be viable in the long run.  It can be a lot of additional 
work to insure that each article is properly indexed and linked, often 
from places whose existence is completely unknown to the newcomer.  One 
established contributor has taken to setting up a series of Wiktionary 
articles withe the title format [[Polish word: foo]].  It would be a 
whole lot simpler if the [[foo]] article could have a PL in it's index box.

Eclecticology