Talk:Where the Wild Things Are (disambiguation)
Latest comment: 14 years ago by ShelfSkewed in topic October 12 edits
 | Disambiguation | |||
| ||||
October 12 edits edit
I don't see any of the recent changes as improvements: lumping in the uses related to Sendak's book with all the others, and adding a lot of information that simply repeats what's already in the links or is not necessary for disambiguating the uses. What is your reasoning behind taking an organized, clean page and making it a single, overworded list?--ShelfSkewed Talk 17:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- MOS:DAB. The primary topic and introductory line should be separate. Descriptions should be "just sufficient to allow the reader to find the correct link." "Very small sections [such as the 2-entry section for the adaptations] may impede navigation, and should usually be avoided."--Cúchullain t/c 18:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- I think that's fine--with one minor restoration (and I know we disagree on this issue, but if we leave it off, someone else will add it, anyway). Thanks!--ShelfSkewed Talk 21:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, the song. My bad; as much as it is counterintuitive to me to leave entries with no articles or sections in articles of their own, that does seem to be the preferred way to do things. Thanks for the catch.--Cúchullain t/c 15:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
- I think that's fine--with one minor restoration (and I know we disagree on this issue, but if we leave it off, someone else will add it, anyway). Thanks!--ShelfSkewed Talk 21:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. Also, I should have said before that in general I agree that very small sections should be avoided, but I usually make an exception for works derived from the primary topic, if there is one, so that they can be easily found or easily ignored depending on what the user is looking for. Best, --ShelfSkewed Talk 16:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)