Template talk:Disambig-cleanup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] TfD debate

This template survived a debate at TfD. See here for the discussion. -Splash 01:21, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Different text

To aid in understanding and cleanup, I propose this new text (I have only changed the small cleanup-related text):

This is a disambiguation page — a list of articles associated with the same title. If an internal link referred you to this page, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article.
Note: This page needs to be cleaned up. Entries should be restricted to a specific description and only be linked to one article. See the Manual of Style for more information.

What do you think? Can we update the template with this? Is there a better wording?--Commander Keane 08:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Placement

Shouldn't this be placed at the top like all the other clean up templates? I know this is a special case, but now that it uses the ambox style it doesn't fit in at the bottom. - Rocket000 00:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

In most cases, ambox should really be at the top of the page, but I don't see why it should in the case of dab pages. See below. – sgeureka t•c 08:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ambox style

I'd prefer this template to go back to the old non-ambox style because

  1. dab pages are not articles (and "ambox" stands for "article message box") - cleanup templates for categories (also non-articles) also don't use ambox, see for example Category:Underpopulated categories
  2. it requires some non-trivial skills to cleanup dab pages (I mean, I needed to read MOS:DAB several times to understand even its mainpoints), and cleanup tags usually intend to bring non-regular editors up to speed for (minor) cleanup work. But non-regular editors generally do not clean up dab pages, so why should a template scream at them each time they come to such a dab page when they can't really do anything about it for lack of experience?
  3. {{disambig-cleanup}}, similar to {{disambig}}, is concerned with the status of the page via categories, not to tell the reader what is wrong with the page in the first place. I think most people use Category:Disambiguation pages in need of cleanup to find dab pages in need of cleanup, so the design of this template only matters to the reader, not the dab editors. So I think the template should be as unobtrusive as possible.

– sgeureka t•c 08:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with all these points, and add the opinion that the old template wasn't broken, and didn't need fixing. Put it back to what it was, as this style will not result in better dab pages, but likely will make things worse, if it has any effect other than annoying readers. Chris the speller 13:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Current consensus at Template:Ambox#Actual discussion of the pros and cons of using Ambox on Category pages agrees with the "keep amboxes out of non-article pages" argument, so I'll be bold and change {{disambig-cleanup}} back now instead of waiting for some more days for comments. – sgeureka t•c 06:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)