Talk:Lift

Older discussion

Lifeisunfair, if want to lecture me about disambiguation pages, at least read over MOS:DP before you go correcting my changes. —Michael Z. 2005-11-27 08:00 Z [moderated my remark —MZ]

Firstly, I use edit summaries to explain my edits, not to "lecture." If you believe that someone has erred, it's entirely possible (and appropriate) to let him/her know without being rude (especially given the fact that your "style repair" included a complete sentence).

Secondly, I suggest that you read the entire page before you go correcting my changes.

"Redlinks (links to articles not yet written) may be included only if you are confident that an encyclopedia article could be written on the subject." "In most cases, place the items in order of usage, with the most-used meanings appearing at the top and less common meanings below."

I'll take your word on the ballet/pas de deux issue, but do you honestly believe that Lift (dance) is likely to be created (and serve as more than a dictionary definition), and that this is a more common application of the word "lift" than references to the aerodynamic concept?

And while hitchhiking is referred to as "lifting," isn't it more common to refer to the hitchhiker's ride as a "lift"? (Of course, there's no reason why we can't include both.)

Incidentally, while the term space lift is somewhat common, it doesn't appear as though the hypothetical space elevators are commonly referred to simply as "lifts." (I've modified the entry accordingly.) As this is a type of elevator, why shouldn't it be indented below that entry? (You didn't explain that change.) —Lifeisunfair 15:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I apologize for my remark at the top, but you wrote at great length about how I didn't understand disambiguation pages elsewhere, and then along with your edits in response you added a rather poor example to WP:D, which flatly contradicted several of the conventions. Perhaps I was frustrated by the exchange, and suffered a lapse in courtesy.

I'm no expert on dance, but from the articles it's clear that ballet is only one genre in dance that uses lifts. In my opinion, lift (dance) could easily accompany other articles in Category:Partner dance technique; it's a matter of judgement and I don't feel strongly about whether the red link is there or not of its own merit, but it lets us include a much neater line which better fits the MOS recommendation and makes self-evident the reason for a second link in the line.

Although the term space elevator is etymologically related to passenger elevator, it's a very different class of device (perhaps like space shuttles and shuttle buses), so I see no need to group them together. This is a minor judgement call, but indenting is not recommended by the guidelines and needlessly makes the page more complex, so that tipped my judgement against grouping these items.

This example also has no clearly most-prominent meaning, so I listed the items alphabetically, within the general groups recommended by MOS:DP#Order of entries. —Michael Z. 2005-11-27 22:22 Z

"I apologize for my remark at the top, but you wrote at great length about how I didn't understand disambiguation pages elsewhere,"

I certainly have disagreed with your assessment of the current {{disambig}} template's setup and ideas for modification, but I don't recall claiming that you don't understand disambiguation pages.

"and then along with your edits in response you added a rather poor example to WP:D, which flatly contradicted several of the conventions."

I attempted to adapt the list to meet these conventions, but I'm not perfect. Neither are you, as you introduced at least one (and arguably more than one) MoS-discouraged element.

"Perhaps I was frustrated by the exchange, and suffered a lapse in courtesy."

I appreciate the apology. Likewise, I'm sorry if any of my comments came across in the manner that you described.

"I'm no expert on dance, but from the articles it's clear that ballet is only one genre in dance that uses lifts. In my opinion, lift (dance) could easily accompany other articles in Category:Partner dance technique;"

But what could such an article contain (aside from a dictionary definition and material that should be included in the individual dance articles)?

Several prominent sports involve kicking, but we don't have an article entitled Kick (sports). How much is there to say about a simple motion?

"it's a matter of judgement and I don't feel strongly about whether the red link is there or not of its own merit, but it lets us include a much neater line which better fits the MOS recommendation and makes self-evident the reason for a second link in the line"

Aside from my point about not including redlinks to unlikely articles, the MoS clearly indicates that when linking to an article for which the disambiguation term is only one component (not the primary focus), it's acceptable for said link to fall elsewhere than the beginning of the entry. (It obviously isn't possible to include an anchor notation, which is why it's okay to bend the guideline slightly.)

":: Although the term space elevator is etymologically related to passenger elevator,"

It's closer in function to a freight elevator . . . In fact, it is a type of freight elevator (on a grand scale).

"it's a very different class of device"

An igloo and a skyscraper belong to very different classes, but both are "buildings." "Elevator" is a similarly broad term, despite the fact that it usually refers to the relatively mundane variety (largely because the extraordinary type does not yet exist in real life).

"(perhaps like space shuttles and shuttle buses),"

The same degree of similarity is absent; the two terms merely share a word.

"so I see no need to group them together."

As far as I can tell, the term "space lift" (in this context) is used purely because it describes a type of elevator (which is also known as a "lift"). Most of the pertinent references that I found were from countries where Commonwealth English is prevalent. Naturally, a "space elevator" would be called a "space lift," and this is directly related to the fact that an ordinary "elevator" is called a "lift."

"This is a minor judgement call, but indenting is not recommended by the guidelines"

It isn't discouraged, and it's become a widely accepted practice. In my opinion, it's highly useful, and should be added to the MoS as a recommended element.

"and needlessly makes the page more complex"

I disagree. The level of complexity is entirely manageable, and this practice enables readers to find their desired articles with greater ease (either by quickly skipping past numerous links to topics unrelated to their search, or by quickly homing in on a set of links to one or more applicable topics).

"This example also has no clearly most-prominent meaning, so I listed the items alphabetically, within the general groups recommended by MOS:DP#Order of entries.

There isn't one meaning that's more common than all others, but there clearly are some meanings that are far more common than others. The current order seems appropriate to me, aside from the high placement of Lift (soft drink). As you know, however, the MoS recommends placing entries comprised of the disambiguation term followed by parenthetical clarifiers at the top of the list. None of these rules are etched in stone, but in the interest of uniformity, this one is fairly sensible. —Lifeisunfair 00:44, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: Lift (Radiohead song)

This should be listed. Radiohead is NOT the target page, so

Wikipedia:DABSTYLE which says "Include related subject articles only if the term in question is actually described on the target article".

doesn't apply here. I've seen other disambig pages list items without articles. This is a notable, real world example, and I will list it again in a few days if no one objects. Avindra talk / contribs 22:21, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

If Radiohead isn't the target page, what is? 86.147.206.66 (talk) 22:55, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Nothing is, and I've seen DAB pages that list items without any target page. Avindra talk / contribs 05:29, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking)#Principles: The page from which the hyperlink is activated is called the anchor; the page the link points to is called the target.

If the listing in question reads: Lift, an unreleased 1996 Radiohead song - then Radiohead is the target.

See also WP:DABSTYLE: Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link

The listings you've seen which have no target page may be listings that should be removed. Feel free to provide an example 86.147.206.66 (talk) 08:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

There are 2 items to consider:

1. Items that are disambiguated, should be mentioned within the article that is linked to. The song is described in the article List of Radiohead songs. So that's the most likely target page for a disambig link. (Done.)
2. The link Lift (Radiohead song) is currently a redirect to In Rainbows, but that doesn't seem to be appropriate or relevant (the song isn't mentioned anywhere within that article). Unless someone else has better info, we should change that to point to the List of songs, too.

HTH. -- Quiddity (talk) 20:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for linking Quiddity, wasn't aware of the song listing page. It's unbelievable how bureaucratic some Wikipedians can be over the most trivial nonsense. Avindra talk / contribs 22:15, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Primary topics

I think that lift is an example of an ambiguous terms that has a couple of primary topics and a whole bunch of secondary ones, similar to Mercury or Mojave - for that reason, it's appropriate to start with "Lift usually refers to elevator and aerodynamics and can also refer to..." I personally feel that an elevator and the force that makes places fly are the to main topics for this word, although that could probably be debated. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Those are 5th and 10th meanings given in the OED, and the 10th and 12th meanings given by m-w.com. I don't think any of the "lift" topics need the promoted appearance; the list is long enough for grouping, and the groupings serve well. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Hitchhiking

Should hitchhiking be on the page? I noticed it was, but most people wouldn't have it as a lift. Your opinions here: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.47.116 (talk) 10:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)