Talk:Pass

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Disambiguation This page is part of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] Cleanup

(Continuing from Talk:Passing)

It seems to me that there are two kinds of cleanup that may be appropriate here:

  • MoS:DP says only one link per line. This is a pretty mechanical cleanup.
  • Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary seems to apply to much of the content. I'm not sure where to draw the line - clearly some of it is appropriate, but a lot of it is just definition.

I'll try to do a bit of the more mechanical cleanup (e.g., do the examples for "special ticket" really need to be a bulletized list?), but let's talk about the WP:WINAD question. Jordan Brown 03:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, all the definition lines with no content should go. Also, the bracketed examples on the ends of lines should go.
Passage should not be in the list of versions of "pass" but should stand alone.

[edit] Proposed restructure

For the Proof of Age Standards Scheme, see PASS.

A Pass can refer to:

Pass (surname) may refer to:

Passing or To pass can refer to:

  • Passing (sociology) means to pass ones self off as a member of one or more different sociological groups such as different:
    • Passing (disability), a disabled person presenting themselves as not being disabled or as being less disabled than they really are
    • Passing (ethnic group), a member of one ethnic group presenting themselves as a member of another
    • Passing (gender), a person of one sex presenting themselves as a member of the opposite gender, or an intersexed person presenting themselves as a chosen gender
    • Passing (racial identity), a person of one race presenting themselves as a member of another
    • Passing (sexual orientation), a person of one sexual orientation presenting themselves as another
    • Passing (social class), a person of one social class presenting themselves as a member of another
  • Passing (juggling) is when two or more people share a juggling pattern
  • Passing of vehicles on roads
  • Passing in regards to the process of digestion
  • Passing (law) approval of a proposed law by a legislative body

Passing is also:

Similar terms:

  • Passing away is a euphemism for dying
  • Passing off (legal term), a way of enforcing an unregistered trademark by showing that someone else has pretended or impled that something else is the same
  • Passage (strait), a very narrow but navigable shipping channel

[edit] Comments?

That's about as tightly as I could see it being trimmed, but introduces a couple of red links that might not ever go anywhere. Pass (compiler) and Passing (law) would fudge out the red links. :) --AliceJMarkham 06:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me, with the two fudges you list.

Perhaps PASS should move into the main list. Jordan Brown 19:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I've left the surname section separated for now. WP:MoS appears to imply that this should be a separate section, and if any additional people are added with this surname, it will be justified.
Rather than fudge links, I've simply done them as non-links.
I've just done what I hope is my final edit of this page for some time. No bolding within entries, sorted to put non-link entries at the bottom of the sections, etc. --AliceJMarkham 22:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I found a few more nits, and I'm not entirely happy with the compiler meaning (but I can't come up with anything better), but I think our work here is pretty much done... good work! Jordan Brown 05:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right, that one does still need some more thought. I've just done a few more changes to make a few entires more concise.
Given that the scale of the changes now are only the odd word here, I think we're pretty close to done. Yay to us. :) --AliceJMarkham 01:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misguided merge

_ _ A colleague has tagged the accompanying Dab for Dab-CU. I am not going to touch it, bcz i find the overall reorganization of about 18 months ago to be a gross mistake, primarily in succumbing to the easy conflation of the noun "pass" and the essentially separate noun forms of the verb "to pass". The former Pass and Passing probably needed reorganizing in ways that would have benefited by the editors taking a viewpoint that considered each in light of the other, but the result should have been two Dab pages, each with a lk to the other:

and

Even if the page were not longer than a single screen (thereby presenting a needless impediment to the careful, the single page would still be a self-mockery in making the distinction, via a second intro line:

Passing can be:

yet failing to put it on the Passing page -- the page where the well-oriented user (the long-term phase of our typical users' experience) went initially, only to be redirected onto an omnibus page on which the information they sought is, unnecessarily, below the halfway point on the screen, and more than likely off the bottom of it.
_ _ It says at the bottom of every Dab page that everything on the page would be, in this case on Pass, if it weren't for multiple topics having that as their otherwise most appropriate title. We don't tolerate verbs and adjectives as titles of articles (unless the topic is a work that has such a word or phrase as its title, or the article is not on the topic that part of speech names, but on the topic of the word or phrase itself, as with fuck (not a Rdr to Sexual intercourse) and posh (not a Rdr to luxury good). Yet this Dab page penalizes those who understand that and type "passing" when they are interested in the verb "to pass", for the accommodation of those who have not yet learned, from WP or professionally edited (print or online) encyclopedias, about the noun convention, or are looking more or less at random for ways to search for titles that use one word, without using the search box or an external search engine.
_ _ I would welcome the chance to put at least another 2¢ in if it turns out i'm not the only one who sees a problem.
--Jerzy•t 06:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)