This page is within the scope 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 or contribute to the
discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles
It appears that the style of hatnotes has changed. I've looked at various templates but I haven't managed to find where this change was actually made. Was there a discussion before the change was made?
Un assiolo (
talk)
19:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Do we have an "About-Distinguish-For" hatnote? If not, I think we should.
"About-Distinguish-For" would be a very useful template. Several articles I recall would benefit from hatnotes of that particular nature. Here's one example:
There might be better examples, but in this instance:
ABOUT: Identifies which one this is, obviously.
DISTINGUISH: Specifically singling out the most significant (Oscar winner), and most likely to be incorrectly Wikilinked.
FOR: Then the disambiguation page w/ multiple other Departure-named flicks; directly to section.
While it could be done all freeform with one of those custom text ones, I was kind of surprised not to see one of these amongst the lists of potential hatnote options, considering all of the other combinations.
And I found this in the archive, which looked suitable, but unfortunately it doesn't exist:
Testing //composed hatnote|about|SUBJECT|distinguish|SIMILARCONCEPT|for|USE|PAGE|text|TEXT\\.
But that would be the ideal About-Distinguish-For.
I dunno if there's one that I'm overlooking somewhere OR some way to squeeze a "For-custom-text" hatnote template WITHIN an About-Distinguish one, by any chance…? Dubious. --
Cinemaniac86TalkStalk15:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't see why the 2008 and 2015 films need some special distinction separate from the other films. I think {{
For|other films with the same title|Departure (disambiguation)#Films}} producing:
would be sufficient. If there is actually some good need to distinguish two out of the set for some reason, this can be done with {{
About|the 2015 English-French film|the 2008 Japanese film|Departures (2008 film)|other films with the same title|Departure (disambiguation)#Films}} producing:
Yeah, I appreciate that option and your POV, thank you. But it doesn't phrase it as "Not to be confused with", in the middle. Like I stated, I feel like that is one missing combo, and there are so many similar combos.
For example, there is REDIRECT-Distinguish-For. So why can't there be About-Distinguish-For?
Like I said, this may not be the quintessential example to work with, but it's AN example. Think outside the box. Is there some way to manipulate the templates to create This page is about XXXX. Not to be confused with Xx Xx. For other/similar ____, see XXXX (disambiguation)? --
Cinemaniac86TalkStalk00:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The multiplicity of hatnote templates with differing parameters is already very confusing. I can't see adding yet another to the mix, especially when the use case need isn't very clear. Why make more work when there is no need?
older ≠
wiser01:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Is there a way to combine multiple hatnotes?
Specifically for
this article. I find hatnotes on multiple lines looks trashy and like we don't know what we're doing, I think both hatnotes in this scenario assume the audience is stupid but it's got consensus so I just want to tidy it up if possible.
Darkwarriorblake (
talk)
20:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Ah, that ought to be utilizing the
Redirect-Distinguish-For hatnote template. I just replaced it, so it's now combined all on one line. It follows example #4, where the "redirect" input is also the same as the "disambiguation" input, with the "not to be confused…" in the middle. Hopefully that doesn't create some kerfuffle! --
Cinemaniac86TalkStalk23:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I don't think it's helpful: we're talking about two different kinds of navigation, and the combined hatnote is confusing. I#ve reverted to the two separate hatnotes which, I think, are clear and not "trashy".
PamD08:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)reply
No, it looks trashy and puts a longer barrier between the reader and the important text. I've found hatnote group which does what I want per step 5 "Ideally, limit hatnotes to just one at the top of the page or section. Multiple hatnotes may be appropriate when they serve different purposes, such as disambiguating topics with similar names and explaining redirects. (In such cases, consider using hatnote group.)"
Darkwarriorblake (
talk)
08:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Ahh, good, everyone's happy! Yes, I was worried there would be an issue with the fact that the "redirect" and "disambiguation" was interrupted by the "distinguish". This solution seems most ideal, so that it doesn't look discombobulated. --
Cinemaniac86TalkStalk15:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)reply