Talk:Badge
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Badge is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject. Please Join, Create, and Assess. Remember, the project aims for no vandalism and no conflict, if an article needs attention regarding vandalism or breaches of wikiquette, please add it to the article watch list. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
[edit] Why remove Disambiguation message?
Disambiguation pages are for resolving between articles that would otherwise have the same name, such as ABC. I've taken to adding things like you have here to disambiguation pages that meet this first criterion, but not frequently nor aggressively. One could expand the page into a full article and refer to different badge types, or one could create a list of badge types as alternatives.
Courtland 03:49, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
P.S. I forgot to add this link that contains the policy basis for my reasoning ... Wikipedia:Disambiguation.
[edit] Why place in the move-to-Wiktionary queue?
What is presented here is essentially a dictionary definition with links to a couple of instances of the defined class of object, as well as a usage note. Also, the current Wiktionary:Badge needs help and merging this definition into that entry would help ... though that is not at all a driver for requesting a move to Wiktionary, only a positive consequence.
Courtland 03:49, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
- This is about a real thing and as such should not be moved to wiktionary. I've expanded a little. Kappa 11:08, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I agree. My suggestion that this go to Wiktionary was not a statement about whether or not there should be an article in Wikipedia on this topic; it was a statement about the current article, no offense intended. Moving something to Wiktionary in no way bars the expansion and existence of the nominated article. You've made me aware that you are interested in expanding this article, so there's no reason for me to re-place the move-to-Wiktionary message; however, I'll likely take a part of the content to enrich the current Wiktionary entry, which is thin, attribute this article as a source and back-link to it. Actually the move-to-Wiktionary message could do with some improvement in wording because it implies that anything that is moved isn't worthy of an article, which is just not true in many cases, this one included. Also, it is really certain that if this article were put onto the pages-for-deletion list (which I wouldn't have done myself) it would not garner enough supporting votes to actually be deleted. How do you feel about this? Courtland 12:30, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
- I should explain that my interest in this article is in preventing its deletion rather than expanding it myself, since I don't have any special knowledge of the topic. Regarding the wiktionary tag in general, can we discuss it somewhere else, such as Wikipedia_talk:Things_to_be_moved_to_Wiktionary#Wiktionary_tag_of_doom? Kappa 15:27, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I agree. My suggestion that this go to Wiktionary was not a statement about whether or not there should be an article in Wikipedia on this topic; it was a statement about the current article, no offense intended. Moving something to Wiktionary in no way bars the expansion and existence of the nominated article. You've made me aware that you are interested in expanding this article, so there's no reason for me to re-place the move-to-Wiktionary message; however, I'll likely take a part of the content to enrich the current Wiktionary entry, which is thin, attribute this article as a source and back-link to it. Actually the move-to-Wiktionary message could do with some improvement in wording because it implies that anything that is moved isn't worthy of an article, which is just not true in many cases, this one included. Also, it is really certain that if this article were put onto the pages-for-deletion list (which I wouldn't have done myself) it would not garner enough supporting votes to actually be deleted. How do you feel about this? Courtland 12:30, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed merge of Campaign button
- Oppose. The proposal to merge campaign button here was made in July 2007 with no comments prior to December 1. Campaign buttons may be considered a subclass of badges, but I think they deserve their own article. - PKM 20:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. --DavidPickett (talk) 03:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
