Talk:Scrub

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] Scrubs (webcomic)

Is this really notable enough to be included? The comic itself looks fine to me, though. EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME 13:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


i just added examples of real life scrubs, is that fine

[edit] scrubber

you could add scrubber as a person who scrubs money


[edit] Redirect to Tv show

I think Scrubs should redirect to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrubs_%28TV_series%29 This page should be a disambiguation page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.136.207 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Scrubs disambiguiation

I don't know how to report or mark something as being inappropriate, but whoever wrote that Scrubs is "a television sitcom about life working in a hospital full of queers and fagetssssssssss" should somehow be sanctioned.

[edit] scrubS should undoubtably redirect

the plural of scrub, "Scrubs" should link to the TV series, which is undoubtedly what people want when they search for Scrubs. To redirect to the singular form "Scrub" is just plain stupid. There can be a disambiguation link to the singular "scrub" on the page.Dkkicks 00:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It's more than possible that users might be looking for scrub (as in scrubland) in particular; less so in the plural form, but there is no way that Scrub should go straight to the TV show. --Harris 21:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Scrub should redirect to the disambiguation page, but Scrubs should go to the TV series. I can tell you that most of the searches for "Scrubs" are for the television show. Enigmaman (talk) 00:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I guess no one will respond to this. It's just a bad decision, though. Enigmaman (talk) 08:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, i didn't reply before now, but i'm afraid you're wrong. Even though 90% at least of the people searching "scrubs" on here will be looking for the tv program, the point is that, the tv show is not the primary usage of the word, obviously, its named after the scrubs type of clothing. So to make Scrubs redirect to the tv program would be against policy, particularly if scrub was to redirect here, as thats a very different usage of the word--Jac16888 (talk) 13:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
As everyone who has suggested it has agreed, the plural should redirect, not the singular form. The vast majority of people searching for "Scrubs" are looking for the TV program. It would make sense to have "scrub" go to the disambiguation page, and "Scrubs" to go to the TV series with a disambiguation link at the top. Enigmaman (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Please listen to what i am saying. Scrubs are, first and foremost, a set of clothing worn by medical staff. Which is what the show is named after. Just because most people will be searching for the tv show, doesn't mean we should go against policy, WP:Disambig. Remember, wikipedia is not a fansite--Jac16888 (talk) 19:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you're responding to my old comments, I'll respond to yours. :) I still disagree, but oh well. I tend to think that if the vast majority of searches for a term are looking for something specifically, the term should go to that article, and then there should be a disambig link at the top. I'm a believer in convenience. Enigma message Review 19:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I think "Scrubs" should favor what scrubs are-- that is, the clothing-- over the recent television series about hospital series whose name is based on (once again) scrubs as a type of clothing. I know that the average media-absorbing web surfer will be wanting to come to "Scrubs" to find out what the theme song is or to see if they'll be putting on new episodes. HOWEVER, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia by definition. It should go to an explanation of what "scrubs" are when being searched for, and their history etc., and yes, the reader should also be made aware of the cultural reference to it with a "For the television show, see..." at the top. In a hypothetical example, say that CBS aired an action-detective-drama called Harry Truman that received substantial attention and high ratings-- everybody on the internet begins rushing to Wikipedia to find out about this new amazing venture in television. Does this mean that searches for Harry Truman should be directed to the more popular search result according to pop culture at the time? Scrubs refer to clothing, and have always meant clothing, and won't stop meaning the clothing. What's more, the television show also refers to the clothing. ~ magbatz 02:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Scrubs Question

I recently added that the show was somewhere with a day of tacoma Washington and it was deleted? i was sent a message that it was vandalism? why is this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.160.75.161 (talk • contribs) 09:05, 14 February 2007.

[edit] Cleanup

I cleaned up this disambiguation page per MOS:DAB and removed the following entreis because they were dictionary-like entries (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary) and/or because the linked article didn't mention the word scrub, making such entries nonnotable. Dicdefs can be added to wikt:scrub if they don't exist there yet.

  • An unskilled player, in the terms of fighting games.
  • Scrubbing audio or video content, moving the currently viewed or heard part of it backwards or forwards in order to locate something in it quickly
  • To scrub a RAID array. This refers to examining an array and regenerating parity information.
  • Vigorous cleaning, usually with a brush

– sgeureka t•c 10:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Considering what's currently on the page, all of those sound like they belong. Enigmaman 06:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enigmaman (talk • contribs)
No, because those are dictionary definitions, which belong on Wikitionary, not here--Jac16888 (talk) 18:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
That reply is a little late. :) Enigma message Review 19:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Oops. I saw the page had just being edited, and mistook your comment for the most recent edit. Sorry--Jac16888 (talk) 19:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Heh, it's a common assumption to think the latest stuff will be on the bottom, but obviously that's not always the case. Man, I was a bit of a newb back then. Enigma message Review 19:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)