Template talk:Hndis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents


[edit] A little help...

Can someone point me to the discussion about this template being redirected? Thanks in advance — Bellhalla 07:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_%28disambiguation_pages%29/Disambiguation_subcategories Tedernst | talk 16:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted. That edit is jumping the gun. The poll requires the template to be removed, not redirected. The WP:D requires that these entries be added to the Wikipedia:Multiple-place names list and each page changed to orphan the template before the template can be deleted, and I don't see how that can happen with a redirect. This is not following the proper procedure for TfD.

--William Allen Simpson 06:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, this template is deprecated. This means that it should no longer be used. Instead of this template you can use {{disambig}} and Category:Human name disambiguation. --Commander Keane 05:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

If it was deprecated at one point, it is not now deprecated. Chris the speller 20:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category

Categories for deletion This category was nominated for deletion or renaming on 2006 March 16. The result of the discussion was keep.


As the category is being kept, we should keep this template as well. It's a simple way to add the category. Besides, as long as the template is not being deleted as per TfD, there isn't really a reason to not use it. -- User:Docu

The preceding undated comment was made 03:00, March 25, 2006 by Docu. Chris the speller 22:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I for one am very glad that this template (and the associated category) were not deleted. They make a very useful pair in adding clarity to disambiguation pages. --BrownHairedGirl (talk • contribs) 14:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template

Templates for deletion This template was considered for deletion on 2006 March 25. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Remove cat:dabs from the templates

We should remove cat:dabs from the template, imho, as it's a supercat of cat:people-dabs. In general (and here), it's not good to have the same page (here, many pages) in both a supercat and a subcat.—msh210℠ 20:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

In general no, but in this case, I think it's preferable to keep it in there. It facilitates identifying all disambiguation pages and it isn't really a problem for Category:Disambiguation to have them in there as well. -- User:Docu

[edit] Why?

I question the benefit of assigning categories to disambiguation pages. Isn't it conceivable that a band could form with the name Greg Ellis (but no members so named) thus making the template obsolete? - BalthCat 19:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Human name?"

Why the awkward term "human name"? All names are used by humans. Perhaps if we were space aliens, we could use this term to refer to names adopted by those humans over there on Earth.

Since it links to personal name, I will change the text. —Michael Z. 2006-11-06 21:05 Z

This human name article is a disambiguation page — a list of pages that might otherwise share the same title, which is a person's or persons' name. If an article link referred you here, you might want to go back and fix it to point directly to the intended page.

Come to think of it, this is not so well written overall.
  • This "human name article" is not an article at all: it is a disambiguation page
  • "Person's or persons' name" is needlessly redundant
  • It is not quite consistent with the text of template:disambig
Any objections to change it to the following?
This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same personal name. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article.
Yes, it's almost identical to template:disambig. But why make changes to that text which serve no purpose? Why confusingly mix the phrases "human name" and "person's or persons' name"? —Michael Z. 2006-11-06 21:12 Z

This really ought to be about personal names, not just human names. Someday, a cat (say) named after Erwin Schrödinger (say) is liable to become famous as an animal actor (say, in commercials for a new line of personal quantum computers marketed by Apple —they're just the guys to do this sort of thing). Even if only human names are likely to come up in the near future, there's no reason to limit this arbitrarily. —Toby Bartels 19:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I have just reverted an edit which made the change to "personal name". I have no desire to be speciest, but this template is only use on article about humans, and since human biographical articles are categorised separately for non-human ones, the distinction is relevant. Also, personal name is less clear (it could refer to the "personal name" I give to a place). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I just changed it back to 'personal name', because 'human name' is distracting and sounds ridiculous. Leaving aside arguments about speciesism, everybody knows that 'personal name' means a person's name. Who is going to be confused? --Heron (talk) 18:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Clone" wording stinks.

It is horribly annoying to have to go into edit mode to see if the disambig is the correct one ! ! ! It makes it VERY inconvenient to change disams that are not already changed... so much for "easy improvement" in wikipedia. Not going to change it because I don't feel like dealing with the argument / edit war that will result. Zotel - the Stub Maker 23:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

So someone didn't think of that. There's really no need to ooze your frustration all over the page just to make the point. —Michael Z. 2006-11-06 23:42 Z

[edit] Proposal to change this template

There are biography articles where the first name personal name causes confusion, where the last name causes confusion (surname and {{surname}}), and were two or more terms from a single human name cause confusion {{namedab}}. Using "human name" in {{hndis}} is confusing because the personal name, middle name, and last name of a human all are human names. In addition, the template {{surname}}) is not consistent with the article personal name from which the template derives its meaning. The template {{hndis}} should be change to {{personalnamedab}}. However, proper name should be considered as well. -- Jreferee (Talk) 17:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

How about {{given name}}? -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 05:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other disambig templates?

Are there any other disambiguation templates and categories? (Besides this and {{disambig}}, I mean.) —Toby Bartels 19:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Besides disambig and hndis, there are:
  • disambig-cleanup
  • geodis
  • numberdis
  • mathdab
  • schooldis
  • hospitaldis
  • mountainindex
  • shipindex
  • POWdis
I may have missed one or two, but I am sure this is fairly representative. This seems slightly excessive to me, but there it is. I think one gets created every month or so. Chris the speller 01:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Templates can be categorized, just like articles; notice the category links at the bottom! So take a look at Category:Disambiguation and redirection templates for more templates. Studerby 05:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you! —Toby Bartels 01:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Human name"

Please don't use this term in the template. It makes it seem if we're trying to disambiguate from other species, which is just plain silly.

Peter Isotalo 10:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hint: if you want to win other editors over to your side, it might be counterproductive to describe their actions as "just plain silly". Chris the speller (talk) 15:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, without the silliness then: using the term "human name" for personal name makes it seem as if we're trying to disambiguate from martians and dogs. What's the counter-argument?
Peter Isotalo 18:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
No, we're saying this is a template that is used on a page that disambiguates articles when there are multiple (human) persons that could have the same article name. So "human name" just reinforces the fact that we are talking about "human" persons, not about other uses of the word "person", as in the WP article "Person": "in many jurisdictions a corporation may be treated as a "person" under the law". Since dogs are not persons and not humans, changing from "human name" to "personal name" does not affect them. I am not an expert on the names used by Martians, but I have always imagined that there is little chance of any of their names overlapping names of humans. One thing I do know, however, is that nothing enrages a Martian more than spelling 'Martian' with a lower-case 'm', so be careful. Chris the speller (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "noinclude" tag

{{editprotected}} The template is broken. The first part of the first line "<noinclude>{{pp-template}}<noinclude>" needs a backslash before the second "noinclude". jwillbur 16:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Y fixed. SkierRMH (talk) 16:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
That was my mistake. Sorry, and thanks for the fix. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional characters

If a disambig page contains a fictional human character, should it use the hndis template? Dsp13 (talk) 11:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I know some editors feel that they should be treated differently, but I say that some readers in some cases will not know whether a name refers to a human or a fictional character. Once the disambig page (which will probably be a hndis page) does its job and gets them to the right article, then they will know. After all, even most fictional characters have human names; Mike Hammer is a human name that refers to a (fictional) human, while C3PO is a non-human name that refers to a fictional robot. Chris the speller (talk) 19:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Human name

The term "human name" sounds really odd. I propose changing the wording from "This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same human name." to "This disambiguation page lists articles relating to people with the same name." Bingobangobongoboo (talk) 12:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Double Divider Line

on Peter Powell it seems to be producing a double divider line on the (HN)disambig notice. Should it be doing that?. Peachey88 (Talk Page | Contribs) 00:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It was because the {{hndis}} tag was at the end of a line of text. Adding a few newlines fixed it. jwillbur 00:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)