Talk:Bunny (disambiguation)

Untitled

Change: Bunny from Lexx is not a rabbit. --cruentus 10:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

disambiguation page?

This page seems to be morphing from disambiguation into an article, except an article about what? Does anyone object to turning back into a proper disambiguation page? maxsch (talk) 03:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Explanation for edits

To the editor Baseball Bugs, there is no primary meaning here, read MoS:DP#Linking to a primary topic. Also, I formatted the Wiktionary box and Sailor Moon reference just fine the first time. And to the editor Propaniac, MoS:DP#Categories says that the inclusion of Category:Given names and Category:Surnames, as well their subcats, are OK. Thoughts? Any concerns should be discussed here. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages are not articles. Like redirects, they are a convenience. They are the place to go to find different things with similar names. I don't see the point in trying to pedantically clamp down tightly on these kinds of pages, when their purpose is merely to find other articles. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand. Mind telling me what your point is? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

That maybe somebody will come to this page expecting to find references to objects or people that have "Bunny" in their names, and will wonder why something obvious, like Bugs Bunny, is not listed. The first rule is, serve the needs of the reader. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

If you're referring to the removal of Bugs Bunny and Lola Bunny, let me tell you right now it wasn't me who got rid of them [1]. I think listing them was a good idea too. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

In that case, I'm going to put them back. There is no reason not to include them in a page such as this, provided they link to articles. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty to do it for you [2]. Now I was thinking we could use a redirect for the first entry. Here's what I found:

• Bunny wabbit
• Bunnies!
• Bunny Rabbit
• Bunny rabbits

If you ask me the creation of Bunny (animal) would be best to satify WP:PIPING (the page Ass comes to mind). What are your thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

General responses

Sorry, but I'm just going to respond to the several comments that have been directed at me or my edits in one lump here, since I'm just now seeing all of them:

• The category question was apparently confusion on my part; the MOS does appear to say that adding the name categories is okay.
• Here's what the MOS has to say about the "See also:" section:

There may be a "See also" section which can include:

• Terms which can be confused with Title, for example New Market and Newmarket
• Likely misspellings of Title, for example Belmont, Belmonte and Bellmont
• Different forms of Title, for example Splitting, Split (disambiguation), and Splitter

I don't see how Bugs Bunny and Lola Bunny fall under any of those categories. A disambig page is emphatically not a list of phrases that happen to contain the word being disambiguated, per WP:DISAMBIGUATION#Lists (and I don't know why User:Baseball Bugs responded to me to say that there's nothing in the MOS:DP called "Lists", since that's not where I was linking). The point of the dab page is that there are at least two articles that could be referred to as "PHRASE" so when the user types "PHRASE" into a search engine, the wiki can't be sure which article they're looking for. Somehow, I think even if a user did type in "Bunny" to find "Bugs Bunny", if Bugs weren't on the page they could figure out how to find the Bugs Bunny article.

That being said, I really am not that bothered by including Bugs and Lola; I just think it's going to be an invitation to other users who see that to add any other "Bunny" they can think of and then the page becomes too cluttered and messy to be easily used for its actual purpose, which is why cleanup becomes necessary in the first place.

• In regard to the top-entry question, if you want to create a redirect from Bunny (animal) to rabbit, that's fine, but I don't see why it's necessary. There's no requirement that the first word in the entry BE the disambiguated word. (And, honestly, maybe Bunny should redirect to Rabbit and this page should be at Bunny (disambiguation), because while I understand the whole bit in the MOS about primary topics, does anyone really think that "bunny" doesn't primarily refer to the furry little animal that hops around?) Propaniac (talk) 15:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I support a move to Bunny (disambiguation). But can you get it done? I'll take care of the primary topic, if given the chance. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and moved the dab page, redirected bunny to rabbit, and placing a hatnote there linking to Bunny (disambiguation). Propaniac (talk) 13:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)