User talk:Incompetence: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:02, 23 December 2012

Anti-spam_techniques

Please let me know if you plan to help with Splitting Anti-spam_techniques. --Tim (talk) 16:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Carbon fiber

It appears that you are the main contributor to the redirect currently at Carbon fiber. Your last edit summary reads: "at the very least, nearly all internal links use this in the sense of a composite material, not the raw fiber, and it's likely that external references do too."

I have some slight doubts about this. Could you be more specific as to the "external references"? If you do not think that Carbon (fiber) is an appropriate redirect target, should we convert it to a disambiguation page instead? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I find in practice, the common usage of the term 'carbon fiber' is the rigid polymer composite, whereas the more strictly correct term 'carbon fiber' to mean the fabric is rather less common. I don't remember the numbers exactly but maybe 90% of the internal links assumed that carbon fiber is the composite, but I did my best to move the small number that were linked wrong to the right place (a very few weren't clear either way).

I find that's also reflected elsewhere, if you google 'carbon fiber' and read the pages, a majority will use it to mean the composite.

I don't think that a disambiguation here is worth the hassle, we'd have to use a bot to move all the links to point to the relevant non disambiguation page first, and then do the disambiguation, but then most new links people create would probably be pointing to the disambiguation, and then require correction, it just doesn't seem worth it; the way it is at the moment really is the most common usage, so far as I can tell.- Sheer Incompetence (talk) Now with added dubiosity! 13:02, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 I have some slight doubts about this. Could you be more specific as to the "external references"? If you do not think that [[Carbon (fiber)]] is an appropriate redirect target, should we convert it to a disambiguation page instead? --[[User:SoledadKabocha|SoledadKabocha]] ([[User talk:SoledadKabocha|talk]]) 19:14, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
+:I find in practice, the common usage of the term 'carbon fiber' is the rigid polymer composite, whereas the more strictly correct term 'carbon fiber' to mean the fabric is rather less common. I don't remember the numbers exactly but maybe 90% of the  internal links assumed that carbon fiber is the composite, but I did my best to move the small number that were linked wrong to the right place (a very few weren't clear either way).
+:I find that's also reflected elsewhere, if you google 'carbon fiber' and read the pages, a majority will use it to mean the composite.
+:I don't think that a disambiguation here is worth the hassle, we'd have to use a bot to move all the links to point to the relevant non disambiguation page first, and then do the disambiguation, but then most new links people create would probably be pointing to the disambiguation, and then require correction, it just doesn't seem worth it; the way it is at the moment really is the most common usage, so far as I can tell.- [[User:incompetence|Sheer Incompetence]] ([[User_talk:Incompetence|talk]]) ''Now with added dubiosity!'' 13:02, 23 December 2012 (UTC)