Talk:Wizard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] MoS:DP compliance

Please see MoS:DP. Entries should have only one link, and they should not be ordered chronologically, they should be ordered by frequency of usage. Etymology and reference sections belong in articles, not on disambiguation pages, which exist for the sole purpose of helping readers to navigate to the desired article when multiple articles have ambiguous titles. --Muchness 00:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

"Unlike a regular article page, don't wikilink any other words in the line, unless they may be essential to help the reader determine where they might find the information."

Which is why I only added notable links.

Most (but not all) of these are equally esoteric.

"For places or people, alphabetical or chronological order may make more sense — but only for articles that are equally common. Always place the most-common meaning(s) at the top."

I appreciate thhe response : )

- Jc37 00:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

A couple of points: firstly, the "unless" qualifier you quoted is referring to entries where the disambiguated term is a redlink. If an article exists at the disambiguated title there is no reason to add an additional link to the entry. You also used pipes to conceal the parenthetical disambiguation in several entries, which should not be done under the given circumstances. --Muchness 01:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, wow. You reverted the page in the same minute you posted this. Did you even give a thought to a reply from me? I'd like to AGF, but wow. - Jc37 00:41, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I apologize if you've taken offence; none was intended. My honest and good faith assessment was that your edit was counter to the disambiguation page guidelines – and more to the point, counter to the intended function of dab pages. If you want to make edits in contradiction to Wikipedia's style and content guidelines, I respectfully request that you make the case and establish consensus here on the talk page before adding them to the article. --Muchness 01:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Magician

I have put the most common usage -- the actual articles about wizards -- up front. Goldfritha 01:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a disambiguation page about wizards. While "magicians" should obviously be noted, they shouldn't be noted in this way. - jc37 20:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Those are the articles that contain the information about the most common usage of "wizard". Putting them at the bottom violates Wikipedia rules about disambiguation pages. Goldfritha 00:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Please feel free to show me (giving examples) of how this "violates Wikipedia rules about disambiguation pages". As Snowfire may tell you, we've had several rather long discussions about the introduction to this page. : ) - jc37 20:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

While normally a disambig page should concentrate on things with that name, it also has to take into account the meaning of that name. For instance, fate and destiny are basically synonyms, so the article is at destiny- but the very first link on fate's disambig page is to Destiny, despite it not being the same name. SnowFire 06:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

While I don't entirely disagree with you in this Snowfire, I do think that the implementation in this case is not the way to go. If you're interested in starting another discussion about this, I'm willing, I suppose.- jc37 20:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is it not the way to go? What is the distinction between wizards and magicians that makes it unsuitable? Goldfritha 19:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)