ABC |
= ABC vs. ABC (disambiguation) =
True or false: this article belongs at 00:43, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
:Only if you re a TV-obsessed slave to the corporate state. 
American Broadcasting Company is unimportant outside the US, and even in the US, most people know the companies as Channel 11 or whatever - they would be hard-pressed to make a list of which network goes with which of their local channels. The most widely-recognized meaning of ABC in the US is as a reference to the alphabet. 01:29, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
:: It would be better for someone to disambiguate the links to 01:32, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
:::Also true, but it s fair to ask if a particular meaning of an initialism is sufficiently predominant that it should own the letters, as for instance 03:00, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
:::Links to this page from the main article space have pretty much been redirected to bypass this disambiguation; there are a bunch of Wikipedia- and User-talk-space links remaining, though, which is pretty much expected considering the many uses of the term. 03:20, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
= Well... =
Name some things that Wikipedia has articles for that are of no importance in the 20:28, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
If you insist:
= This disambig. page has abbreviations + =
It seems that this page is covering both abbreviations = ABC as well as phrases that contain ABC . Is that appropriate
: I can t speak for the Wiki Policy, but i think it s perfectly acceptable, giving the fact that when somebody searches for ABC they must get a page that relates to what they have searched for, and since you can t really predict what the particular user was planning to see it would be appropriate to show all the things linked to ABC ... but then who am i, just a small wikipedian...
:: Thanks; that seems reasonable. I m but a small Wikipedian myself (or would that be Wikipesian ), thus my fishin for knowledge on the matter.
::: It is a ... q
Have alphabeticalised categories as I thought that they would be better sorted and would make sections easier to find. I wasn t sure if the misc. category should be ordered, but I decided against it in the end. Unsure though... - 20:15, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
= Need to reorganize =
I thik that the present part of name vs. abbreviations categorization scheme is poorly conceived. For instance, consider ABC weapons. ABC is part of the name, but it is also an abbreviation for atomic, biological, chemical . We need a new system, but I m split between two alternatives.
: The latter (though examples are hard to distinguish). 03:03, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
There is a fundamental illogic about the current structure (name vs abbreviation) - many readers coming here won t know whether it s a name or an abbreviation. Even if they do know, the meaning of the name section (what type of things are in it) isn t clear on its own terms (only makes sense in contrast to abbreviation), so that it should at least be the second section of the two. However, a better structure would be by type of object - readers are likely to know roughly what they re looking for. Organisations, music terms, computing terms would cover most of them, and leave a smallish Other section. 22:28, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
: Yes please 23:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
::There s a clear potential for a section on computers and a section on organizations, but any categorization scheme needs to be non-overlapping. We have an organization that makes computers ( ) 15:22, 19 August 2005 (UTC) ::: Organizations. Today the sell computers, tomorrow raincoats, ...
== Explaining my reorganization ==
I did some relatively minor reorganizing of this page guided mainly by a desire to bring the section headers into closer alignment with a) existing categories and b) section headings that might be useful across multiple disambiguation pages.
:I purposely avoided using Computing or somesuch as a heading because we have one organization that makes computers, and another that makes electronics. -- ) 05:35, 9 September 2005 (UTC) ::I just recently changed this to Computing technology . I understand the potential for ambiguity, but I disagree on the matter of its impact in the context of disambiguation pages. 04:44, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
= Clearing What links here =
Cleaned links to this page from the main article space; a couple remain pending input from more knowledgable editors. 04:48, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
= Removal of basic and all-purpose meaning =
referring to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.phptitle=ABC&diff=25507508&oldid=25507224 archived diff]
That was a good idea as the comparable meaning appears in the Wiktionary entry at 23:35, 14 October 2005 (UTC)|
|