Talk:Crusade (disambiguation)

ustedes no SIRVEN PARA INFO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.175.186.43 (talk • contribs)

Combine Crusaders (disambig) with this?

I'm not convinced that we gain much from keeping Crusaders separate from Crusade. I don't think they used to be separate; someone just made the Crusaders page intending it to be an only sports disambig some time ago, and now it's mildly confusing. I say pile Crusade, Crusader, and Crusaders into this one article.

Also, Milton Stanley: No, it was not an accident that I removed the South Park Crusade which was a random constellation referenced in one episode. Let me ask this: would there be anything to put in an article on it? Countless sources, fictional and otherwise, have randomly referenced Crusade and the like. They don't get to be mentioned here either. By way of comparison, think about how many fictional books, shows, games, and so on reference something called "Excalibur" but use it as something different from the Arthurian legend version. Detailing such a list would take forever and not be a terribly useful task. SnowFire 17:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that we remove all fictional references from all disambig pages? That could take a while. South Park is a fairly influential part of US culture (re Emmy nomination). I'd like to thank you, however, for having the maturity to discuss in on this page rather than starting an edit war, as happens on many other pages. I'm open to discussion. --Milton 17:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course not. I've stuck references to fictional items myself into disambig pages. However, there needs to be a certain standard of relevance met. If "Crusade" was the name of an important character on South Park (or some other show), for example, there'd be no problem with putting it in. If it was an episode title or a major location in a series? Maybe. But simply existing in one episode is probably not enough, unless that episode was absolutely legendary (Say, the Soup Nazi from Seinfeld or the dead clown from the Mary Tyler Moore show). Now, I haven't seen that episode of South Park (or much SP at all), but its notability is not obvious from the current description. I looked at the description of the episode, and it apparently merited a mere one bullet point. Important fictional characters and places are fine for reference, but one-ofs that appear for an episode are simply beyond counting. SnowFire 18:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

High School and College sports/mascots.

"Crusaders" is an extremely common title for sports teams, and I don't think it'd be profitable to list every incidence of that here. Someone interested in Valparaiso sports would go to the Valparaiso article, and the same is true of the innumerable other high schools and universities using "Crusaders." The list would be gigantic and not terribly useful.

Obviously, this isn't true for major professional teams. SnowFire 05:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

If it did get out of hand, a separate dab page Crusaders (sports teams) could easily be created. Abtract (talk) 15:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Crusader (album)

This is also the title of a Chris de Burgh album. --89.59.205.217 18:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Crusade against terror

Should there be a link to a relevant page from here? Titanium Dragon 04:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I dunno. What is a "Crusade against terror"? Ewlyahoocom 05:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Cathars

Where are there Cathars?

Opening sentence

The opening sentence defines crusade as a religious campaign, but this is only true in the context of its use in a specific application (and in which case it should also be capitalised). There already exists a page covering the Crusades, and since this is a disambiguation page, I suggest it would be best to stay clear providing any definition in the opening.

Instead, I propose two more headings should be added further down the page;

• Crusade
• Wiktionary - crusade

Obscurasky (talk) 16:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Crusade is a redirect to Crusades, thus it is in effect the primary topic. In general, people will only get to this page by clicking on the hatnote on Crusades. Presentation of the primary topic is discussed at WP:MOSDAB#Linking to a primary topic. The non-Crusade definition could be dispensed with, as there doesn't appear to be any article dealing with the usage and in such cases, dictionary content properly belongs in Wiktionary. Also, in the context of referring generically to any one of the specific Crusades, I believe lower-case is appropriate. older ≠ wiser 17:33, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for the link. I accept your points, though I must say that all this stuff about primary topics completely over-eggs what really ought to be a straightforward procedure. Having different disambiguation page formats and different page naming conventions, depending on whether or not a term has a primary topic, is needlessly complex. As the second sentence on the linked page says 'Disambiguation pages are solely intended to allow the user to choose from a list of Wikipedia articles.......' - which is exactly how it should be; simple, understandable and logical!

Nice job separating out Crusader and Crusade on the disambiguation page.

Obscurasky (talk) 21:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree the logic of disambiguation pages can seem arcane at times. But the principle goes hand in hand with that of using common names for the title of an article. In cases where there is is a one use that is much more common than others, then rather than having most people going to a disambiguation page first, they go to the primary topic and the (usually) fewer readers who are looking for other meanings can access the disambiguation page from the hatnote on the primary topic. older ≠ wiser 22:37, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Then the answer, surely, is that all disambiguation pages should include the word '(disambiguation)' in their title, and they should all conform to the same format. Primary topics could still claim the relevant title for their own. Obscurasky (talk) 16:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Not sure why that is surely the answer. If there is no primary topic, the disambiguation page should be at the simple title. 16:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)