| Revision as of 11:27, 21 December 2005 editHaukurth (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators26,987 edits You yourself habitually make major changes here and even in this revert of yours you are making changes. I've commented out the parts you've contested and we're discussing this on the talk page.← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 00:27, 19 May 2022 edit undoJ947 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers33,898 edits rcat |
| (237 intermediate revisions by 79 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Misplaced Pages subcat guideline|naming conventions|Common names}} |
|
#REDIRECT ] |
|
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions}} |
|
|
'''Convention:''' Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Redirect category shell| |
|
When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Misplaced Pages put into the search engine? |
|
|
|
{{R to section}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{R to project namespace}} |
|
Misplaced Pages is not a place to advocate a title change in order to reflect recent scholarship. The articles themselves reflect recent scholarship but the titles should represent common usage. |
|
|
|
{{R from merge}} |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
Remember that a link is the title of the page it links to. |
|
|
|
|
|
Titles should be as simple as possible without being too general. |
|
|
|
|
|
For example, the page about ] should simply be called "Jazz", not "Jazz music", because "jazz" refers in almost any context to a genre of music, and the simpler title makes linking easier. Adding the word "music" is redundant. |
|
|
|
|
|
On the other hand, Country music should be on a page called ] because the word "country" has other referents besides the musical genre. If we ignore potential ambiguity, the ideal of simplicity can be at odds with the ideal of ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Rationale== |
|
|
Names of articles should be the most commonly used name for the following reasons: |
|
|
* We want to maximize the likelihood of being listed in external search engines, thereby attracting more people to Misplaced Pages. For example, the pagename is ] and not "James Earl Carter, Jr."; the string "Jimmy Carter" in the page title make it easier to find: search engines will often give greater weight to the contents of the title than to the body of the page. Since "Jimmy Carter" is the most common form of the name, it will be searched on more often, and having that exact string in our page title will often mean our page shows up higher in other search engines. |
|
|
* We want to maximize the incidence that people who make a link guessing the article name, guess correctly; people guessing a different name may think there is no article yet, which may cause duplication. |
|
|
* Using a full formal name requires people to know that name, ''and'' to type more. |
|
|
|
|
|
Redirects help, but give a slightly ugly "redirected from" announcement at the top of the page. On the other hand, if someone reads or hears "]", and wonders who might be meant by that, the "redirected from King Billy" on top of the page works slightly comforting when this king turns up under his most common name: the "redirect" message indicates the system hasn't been playing tricks, and that this was the intended king. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Examples== |
|
|
Examples of common names that Misplaced Pages uses instead of a more elaborate, more formal or more scientifically precise version include: |
|
|
*] (not ]) |
|
|
*] (not ]) |
|
|
*] (not ]) |
|
|
*] (not ]) |
|
|
*] (not ]) <!-- A contested example. I'd like to see it go unless we make a point of including other contested examples. --> |
|
|
*] (not ]) |
|
|
<!--*] (not ])--> |
|
|
*] (not ]) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Don't overdo it== |
|
|
In cases where the common name of a subject is misleading, then it is sometimes reasonable to fall back on a well-accepted alternative. For example a "common" name for a ] is "tidal wave" (this term being less often used for the tides-related ]). For this reason, the ] page is a '']'', with links to the two other pages, and not a page giving details about either tsunami or tidal bore. See also: ] |
|
|
|
|
|
Also, some terms are in common usage but are commonly regarded as offensive to large groups of people (Eskimo and Mormon Church, for example). In those cases use widely known alternatives (] and ]). When in doubt, check a mainstream reference work. |
|
|
|
|
|
This does not mean that we should avoid using widely known pseudonyms like ], ], ], or widely known common names of ]s and other things. But it does mean that we need to temper common usage when the commonly used term is unreasonably misleading or commonly regarded as offensive to one or more groups of people. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Subpages== |
|
|
===Policy regarding changed MediaWiki software=== |
|
|
An article with a slash (/) in its title is treated like any other page, as there are no longer any special subpage features in the main (encyclopedia) namespace. Accordingly, the use of subpage notation when naming articles is discouraged. |
|
|
|
|
|
If contributors still want to use the former "slashed" subpage naming, they have the burden of showing that a subpage-like name is necessary, otherwise articles using such names will be moved to a page in line with normal article titles. |
|
|
|
|
|
Example: use "]" or "James T. Kirk (Star Trek)", not "Star Trek/James T. Kirk", for an article on the fictional character Captain Kirk. |
|
|
|
|
|
Unnecessary subpages existing prior to this convention are in the process of being moved to their own, conventionally-named page. For discussions leading to the use of this convention see the ] page. |
|
|
|
|
|
Slashes may be used freely when present in original titles, or usual terminology. Examples: ], ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
===Subsidiary articles=== |
|
|
The present convention for articles providing more detail on a given topic is using the <nowiki>{{</nowiki>]<nowiki>|<subpage>}}</nowiki> and <nowiki>{{</nowiki>]<nowiki>|<subpage>}}</nowiki> templates, in accordance with ]; such templates are placed under a section header, each instance of these templates providing a link to a subpage. |
|
|
|
|
|
Occasionally these subsidiary pages — if containing content that is only relevant as an elaboration of a shorter paragraph on the main page — can have more complex page names, that is, if only intended to be accessed by clicking from the main article. Example: ] has as one of its pages on sub-topics: ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
However, if a "common name" for such subsidiary page is possible, that is always preferred. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Exceptions== |
|
|
|
|
|
While the basic principle of this guideline enjoys wide support there are some cases where its application is disputed or overridden by other concerns. A few such cases are listed here. |
|
|
|
|
|
*Sometimes a technical limitation prevents the use of the most common name. For example "]" is used while "C++" is technically not possible as a page name. |
|
|
|
|
|
*In the past, conflicts have often arisen between those who prefer British spellings and those who prefer American spellings. A ceasefire is in effect which states that both spellings are acceptable for article titles. ''This is irrespective of which spellings are more common.'' For example, a request to move ] to ] on the grounds that the second yields more Google hits will not succeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
<!--*When adherents of two different spellings cannot reach an agreement, sometimes a third alternative is chosen to end the conflict. That alternative may be less commonly used than either spelling of the common name. For example there is currently an article at the somewhat technical term ] to avoid a conflict between ] and ].--> |
|
|
*When the native name of an entity contains characters with diacritics some Wikipedians prefer to use those diacritics in the relevant article title, even in cases where they are more often omitted in English texts. Others prefer to apply the ''most common'' principle throughout. For more details on this dispute see ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
*The naming conventions on royalty and people with titles systematise the relevant article titles. This is sometimes at the expense of the most common name for a person. For example ] is used as an article title instead of the more common ]. For more details see ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
More generally, several guidelines try to give recommendations for enhanced precision, cleaner ], and solution of ]s, which might lead to article names that are "the most obvious" rather than strictly speaking "the most used". Some of these exceptions are contained in the ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
Several guidelines try to systematise certain ''types of article titles'', for example article titles using abbreviations: |
|
|
*]: ] and not ] or ] |
|
|
*]: ] and not ] or ] |
|
|
|
|
|
Many guidelines systematise titles of articles grouped ''by topic'', for example ] and not ], according to ]. For articles on people some minor practical exceptions are contained in ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
==See also== |
|
|
Apart from the main ] page and the ] there are also: |
|
|
* ] - The '''non-guideline''' category of articles about naming conventions; |
|
|
* ] - Search engine testing might in some cases assist in discerning which of two alternative versions of a name is ''most common''. |
|
|
* ] - Poll (2004) regarding the applicability of the ''common names'' principle to geographical entries. |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|