Talk:Tank (disambiguation)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Disambiguation

This is a disambiguation page; please read MOS:DP.

The descriptions by the links only have to be long enough to disambiguate, ie, to let you tell one item from another. Each line links to an encyclopedia article, which is where further information belongs.

Etymology doesn't belong here at all; wiktionary is for that, and it is prominently linked at the top of the page.

  • Tank, Pakistan, a small town in Pakistan's North-Western Frontier Province

The name of the item already says it's in Pakistan; no need to repeat that. North-Western Frontier Province is not a disambiguating link for the term tank. It shouldn't be linked on this page, and in fact, since there are no other towns in Pakistan named Tank, it needn't be mentioned at all.

  • (Informally), to decline dramatically, as in a stock declining rapidly in price, or a film failing in the box office

I've left this in, but it doesn't seem to warrant an encyclopedia article to me. Why don't you click the link and start one? —Michael Z. 2005-12-28 00:36 Z

[edit] Which is the primary topic?

  • Someone wrote: "primary topic on first line per MOS:DP". But to many including me, army tanks are not the overriding main meaning of "tank", and they are not the original meaning of "tank". In daily life I have much more reason to consider my motorcycle's fuel tank, or (on holiday) scuba tanks, than the army variety.Anthony Appleyard 10:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, tank goes straight to the vehicle so that makes it the primary topic. 11:56, 7 September 2006 GraemeLeggett
  • Only because when Wikipedia was starting, the first sort of tank that came to anyone's mind was the army variety. Most people hardly ever see an army tank except in the newspapers and the TV, but their cars' fuel tanks and liquified petroleum gas tanks and suchlike are of daily concern. Anthony Appleyard 17:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
That's a legitimate opinion, but at the moment (for better or for worse) tank is the primary topic. A review of what links to tank shows that the majority of incoming links refer to the military tank, which suggests that it's an appropriate primary topic. If you disagree that it should be the primary topic, you can request a page move at WP:RM to move the dab page to tank, but note that such a move will require manually updating 1000+ wikilinks. In the meantime, per MoS:DP convention, the primary topic should be located at the top of the page. --Muchness 18:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

There already are articles about fuel tank, diving cylinder, and many other kinds of storage tanks. None of them unambiguously belongs at the title tank.

It's not a matter of overriding main meaning, and certainly not of consideration in your daily life, but simply that the tank article happens to have the title "tank" without any disambiguation terms. —Michael Z. 2006-09-07 19:43 Z

[edit] Discussion about deletions

Please discuss here individually any deletions of entries.

  • Tank (magazine), a British magazine :: deleted, redlink
  • Tank (Walkers), a fictional character from a UK advert for Walkers' crisps :: deleted, NN & redlink
  • "To tank" may refer to a sports team deliberately losing a game; see match fixing :: kept, notable because match fixing is notable

Anthony Appleyard 05:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

    • Delete. Dismbig page is a navigation tool between articles with the same possible name, not a dictionary. Wikipedia doesn't have articles for verbs. `'Miikka 19:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Put back. Wikipedia has hundreds of pages about verbs, e.g. Translation, Dilution, Evaporation. Anthony Appleyard 21:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
      • You have a weird interpretation of English grammar. Pardon my French, but dilution is not a verb. Removed. I guess you were thinking about the "Tanking" page. `'Miikka 22:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)