Talk:Dan

Why delete link to User:Dan?

Did someone have a compelling reason for removing the link to my page? No-one had changed this talk page since the days when Dan meant User:Dan, so apparently no-one tried to justify the removal. -- User:Dan

Is this a serious question?? Do you really believe an encyclopedia entry should contain *your* name? Did you ever look at encyclopedia britannica, say, and find an entry on one of the (hudreds of) editors that wrote it?

Britannica does not have user pages. Now, this is "a disambiguation page; that is, one that points to other pages that might otherwise have the same name." My user page might have had the same name. In fact, this originally was my user page. (The User: category didn't exist yet, as I recall.) Some signature links on talk pages may still point here. Seems like a fine use of a disambiguation page to me. Incidentally, you realize that I didn't create the original link to User:Dan, right? The person who made the disamb. page did that.

I disagree. User:Dan is not one of the meanings someone would expect to find in an encyclopedia, including Wikipedia - don't you agree? User pages come in a different namespace, in a different color, and are completely seperate. Can you find another example where a wikipedia article points to a user page? I am not aware of any. Do you expect Elf to point to User:Elf, for example? Lupin to User:Lupin? (these are just random user names I picked from the recent changes list). Should I create a page NYH disambiguating myself (User:Nyh) and New York Hospital? I don't think so.

I disagree. It is because this is an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia would not contain an anonymous user. It is not a contact list. There is a policy which states only person or organization which has some fame will be included in wikipedia. It is crystal clear since an anonymous person is not going to be someone who is known among people.--Wai Wai (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

What is ", which see" [Done]

On an unrelated note, is there a point to the ", which see" ? Just thought I'd ask before I deleted it, because I'm about 80% certain it makes no sense.

Hi, anon. It would be nice if you could sign your comment next time. To sign your comment, simply type --~~~~, the system will auto-generate the signature. Thanks for your co-operation. Yes, you are right. Probably it is left by anyone who forget to complete the rest of the statement before the save. I have deleted it.--Wai Wai (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

there's some obvious vandalism on this page, but i'm not quite sure how to fix it. can someone clear this up? 218.102.117.185 16:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Dan also an old pre-christian name

Didnt look into this page for long time, but noticed that Jallan, ten years ago, did an error removing my text about the scandinavian name Dan (submitted already in 2002), so I put it back. Note that although it has ben claimed that the scandinavian name Dan should mean "someone fron Denmark", this is disputed, based on that the name was in use before that king of Denmark. No 100% explanation of the name has sofar been provided, only speculations. Dan Koehl (talk) 00:20, 27 April 2014 (UTC)