Larry removed a reference to a song entitled "Android" from here, saying something to the effect that a song didn't really deserve its own page unless it was a culturally significant one. I disagree.
Every human endeavor no matter how insignificant deserves a page here, and every possible sense of every word should be listed in a disambiguating page. Indeed, I think s Wikipedia grows, pages with one-word titles should all become dictionary-like descriptions of the word and its various senses, with links to more specific pages on each. One possible argument I might agree with is that one-word titles aren't really "senses" of the word, and will be found by a search on the word anyway, so it might not be neccesary to link from "Android" to "Android (Radiohead song)". --
Lee Daniel Crocker
- Every human endeavor no matter how insignificant deserves a page here, and every possible sense of every word should be listed in a disambiguating page.
If I agreed with that, then obviously I would agree with you, but as I don't, I don't. Simply: why? Also, "disambiguating pages" (pointer pages) are often going to be annoying. When I go to
Paris, I don't want to have to click again to see the article that I obviously expect to see, i.e., the one about Paris, France. If this makes it harder to find Paris, Texas (because I have to click through to reach that article), so much the worse for Paris, Texas. Anyway, we'll make copious use of parentheses, as in "Paris (France)" when they're available, and then we
can make
Paris a pointer page as Lee suggests. Even when we do have parentheses, though, I'm quite sure that there will still be many topics that, though the word describing them is ambiguous like almost all words, really don't need their own parentheses pages. --
LMS