Content deleted Content added
WOSlinkerBot (talk | contribs) m add missing italics in discussion close to reduce lint errors |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2) |
||
Line 221:
*"''with the exception of the two''": There may be others in the two extra lists pointed to hereinabove. And in "Shamo chicken → Shamo (chicken)": a main meaning of "Shamo" by itself is a Chinese name of the [[Gobi Desert]]. [[User:Anthony Appleyard|Anthony Appleyard]] ([[User talk:Anthony Appleyard|talk]]) 12:45, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
**Yes, there are many of these cases (see the other, more focused RMs I luanched the other day). [[WP:NATURAL]] instructs us to use natural disambiguation in such cases. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 00:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' My personal preference is to use the parens. This makes it much easier for me to find breeds by their name. Again, personal preference. '''Teaswater sheep''' as a title of an article, to me, would imply that is the name of the breed. It is not. The name of the breed is '''Teaswater'''. Of course, to have a name of an article with just such a title would be confusing and thus the parenthetical. Just my $0.02. '''[[user:BlindEagle|<
**Except if Teeswater Sheep were the name of the breed it would be capitalized like that, not given as Teeswater sheep. Numerous editors of various different kinds of breed editors have been absolutely adamant about this. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 00:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
**SMcCandlish, thank you for explaining that. I see better where you are coming from, now. However, my preference is still to use the parens. I find it easier to understand. '''[[user:BlindEagle|<
* '''Neutral''' I've written many of these articles. I used the parenthetical because the word "sheep" (or "chicken" or "cow" or "pig") is ''most definitely not'' part of the proper name for these animal breeds. Its purpose is solely for disambiguation. This is quite important, since in most cases sheep are named for places. This editorial policy, at '''[[WP:NCDAB]]''', seems quite clear to me. However, as to whether the parens are necessary or not seems a particularly academic question. As long as we use the disambiguation term where necessary, readers will be well served. I personally prefer to defer to whatever other primary authors in this area, like BlindEagle and Justlettersandnumbers, want to do. <font style="font-family:Georgia, serif;">[[User:Steven Walling|Steven Walling]] • [[User talk:Steven Walling|<span style="color: #8080b0">talk</span>]]</font> 20:22, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
*'''Comment 1''': I favor Steven Walling's comment that a certain amount of deference should be given to the article writers, such as JLAN in this case, with the caveat that titling consistency with a set of articles (dog breeds, horse breeds, sheep breeds, chicken breeds) should be maintained whenever possible (I say this in part because WikiProject Equine takes the opposite position on parenthetical titling for some very thoroughly discussed reasons that are not relevant here, but we have no intent to impose our views on other animal projects that have a different convention for standardization). [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|<font color="purple">(talk)</font>]]</sup> 21:32, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
| |||