Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation

Thinking. The word "disambiguation" could be changed into "Word choices". Or maybe not. -- C I M O N 12:45, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

This is a word choices page doesn't sound quite right though. But simplifying would be a good thing. Angela 19:42, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

What about "this is an alternative meanings" page? Got to be better than disambiguation --BozMo |talk 16:31, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

How about something like "multiple meanings"? "This page is here because the article may have a number of different meanings. If an article brought you here, you may wish to go back and fix it so that it goes directly to the most precise meaning of the term"? --Ricky81682 (talk) 22:46, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many meanings? So a page like United States (disambiguation) would become United States (many meanings)? or United States (meanings)? Just brainstorming... (That doesn't exist here, btw, but United States refers to it!) - PhilipR 15:58, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is definitely an old topic, but I think we need to look into it again. Here are my ideas, please add your own.

Pagename (other meanings)
Pagename (other pages)
Pagename (other definitions)
Pagename (other uses)
Pagename (other)
Pagename (index)

We can change the {(disambig)} template to read something better, depending on what we choose. -- Netoholic @ 22:54, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

on the nl:wikipedia it is doorverwijspagina roughly translated as referral page. A text on a referral page could be (example):

Hercules refers to several articles:

* The ancient Roman god and hero: see Hercules (Roman god)

* The name of a transport plane: see Hercules (plane)

* The motion picture: see Hercules (movie)

* The motorcycle brand: see Hercules (motorcycle)

The template:

This page describes several meanings of a phrase. It points to other pages that otherwise might have the same name. If you follow a link, you may go back and fix that link on the page that brought you here.

Marco^vanDuin 12:10, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

How about

This page is a list of more than one meaning for one word.

Shenme 02:50, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Future image commons:Image:Disambig.png[change source]

Halló friends! Please take a look at de:Bild:Logo Begriffsklärung.png, en:Image:Disambig fork.png, nl:Image:Begripsverklaring.png and sv:Bild:Trisambig poseidon.jpg.
Which do you prefer?
Please answer at the oldest (?) discussion page de:Bild Diskussion:Logo Begriffsklärung.png. Thanks! Best regards Gangleri 14:34, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Category[change source]

I think that we should also create a category for all the "disambiguations" (or whatever we decide to call them). It will make it easier to review them. --Ricky81682 (talk) 22:41, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation in title[change source]

Hmm . . . it was realised in 2003 that having "disambiguation" in the title of disambiguation pages was not good, but now in 2008, there are five or six hundred disambiguation pages. Things don't happen very fast around here do they? It would probably have been a much easier problem to fix in 2003 but ho hum . . . SpinningSpark 01:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like the suggestion "Pagename (index)" from netoholic above. It is a short word and is pretty international, so will be easy for non-english speakers. Better still, it sends the message that entries should be short, an important feature of dab pages, but one often overlooked by editors. SpinningSpark 02:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it could be made to fit the 1500 words ~ R.T.G 00:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinks[change source]

Does this wiki have a policy on redlinks in dab pages? I don't see it on the project page. On English Wikipedia the idea is that a dab page should help the user find an article. Redlinks do not generally help, but they do have some exceptions. Take a look at space (disambiguation) and you will see what I mean. It is nearly all redlinks, and a lot of those are just pure spam. SpinningSpark 01:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with no redlinks in dab pages. Griffinofwales (talk) 04:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copy :en WP:MOSDAB[change source]

I'm planning on translating en:WP:MOSDAB and adding it to the MOS here. Any thoughts? Josh Parris 06:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's roughly translated, you can edit at User:Josh Parris/MOSDAB, notes at User talk:Josh Parris/MOSDAB. Thanks! Josh Parris 05:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation is a bad name[change source]

We can get away with calling it Disambiguation on :en, but here I think it ought to be called "Did you mean". "Index" could also work. Thoughts? Josh Parris 06:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed in the past and it was felt that this is the simplest way to explain it without having to use too many words or words that implied more meaning than what disambiguation actually means. -DJSasso (talk) 14:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do we follow English Wikipedia guidelines when Simple does not have info on what to do?[change source]

When formatting guidelines here at Simple Wikipedia don't say what to do, are we supposed to follow En Wikipedia guidelines? For example, I couldn't find whether entries should end with a period or not, but I did find it in En: en:MOS:DABENTRY#Individual_entries and en:Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Page_style. Zeniff (talk) 13:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if we have a guideline, but the usual rule in English is that sentence fragments do not end with a period. Disambiguation entries are normally sentence fragments rather than complete sentences. For a more general answer to your question, I would say that Wikipedia guidelines should only be used if the result does not detract from the principle of simplicity here on Simple. That pretty much overrides everything else. SpinningSpark 14:12, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advice! I'll aim for simplicity, especially when I don't know:) (And sorry for the late reply!) Zeniff (talk) 09:43, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]