Talk:Ajax

Order of importance

Right now this page is the #1 search result for "Ajax"... I'm going to move the computer one to the top. --Joshuadfranklin 22:03, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why move the computer one, in particular? --Piet Delport 13:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AJAX programming technologies are a very prominent topic among the web programming community. I suspect the vast majority of searches for Ajax are looking for this topic. Just Google "ajax" and see what the top topics are. In my opinion, the programming section should be reinstated and moved to the top. Anyone disagree? Daveharr 13:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For that matter, the entire sort sequence of this page does not match user's needs, IMO. The programming methodology, the mythological references, the places, and the cleanser are likely far more searched for than the fictional characters, the vehicles, and the bands. With such a long list of topics disambiguated by this page, we should try to keep the most likely targets for searchers near the top of the page. Daveharr 13:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's primary audience is much wider than just web programmers.

The Google search results for "Ajax" don't carry much weight: this is the web, so things are obviously heavily biased towards web programming hits. --Piet Delport 14:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but can either of you *really* claim that the Ajax car of 1906 is going to more likely to be the reader's real interest than the programming articles? Common sense tells me that programming, mythology, the places, and the cleanser are *by far* the most common uses of this word in our culture. Note that I'm not saying the other articles shouldn't be listed - just questioning why a set of vehicles that are all older than 80 years deserves higher pride of place than a current high-priority technology. Also, IMO, the "this is the web" assertion doesn't carry much weight, since Wikipedia itself shares the same biases. If the consensus is that the current ranking is the most logical, I won't argue more - but so far I don't see any evidence of that. Daveharr 19:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A "current high-priority technology", or a catchy, ill-defined popular coinage lacking any permanent connection to the actual underlying technologies, soon to go the way of LAMP and SPA when the next attention-grabbing buzzword comes around?

Whichever the case may be, it's not the real issue here. The entry order of disambiguation pages is not merely a popularity contest: on a page this size, it's just as important to maintain clean, distinct and appropriately-sized sections of related articles, allowing the reader to skip straight to the relevant one. Sometimes (like now), that means putting the entries of certain prominent, but lone-standing articles in the "Other uses" section, even though some of the entries above it are comparatively obscure. --Piet Delport 02:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree. I added a redirect to the page about the programming interface. Chess2021 (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved Sport higher up, because far more people using this page will be looking for Ajax Amsterdam than any of the Fiction or Music links (and I suspect Vehicles too). Ajax are very famous even outside the Netherlands, have been champions of their country 29 times and have won 15 international trophies including 4 European Cups. I don't know much about programming though, so if someone can make a case for putting Computing above Sport, I am happy for them to do this.

I have also changed the title of this discussion section from Computers to Order. I hope no-one minds; I think my comment fits in with the above discussion, but my comment would look odd if this section still had the title "Computers" (Chorleypie 15:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I changed the section topic from Order to Order of Importance and restored the redirect to Ajax (programming). Think about a person searching "Ajax" on Wikipedia. It is more likely to be the programming topic. Chess2021 (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder for post-Ajax (Declarative Programming) VfD

A user has placed a WikiLink to Ajax (Declarative Programming) into the list; the article is undergoing VfD right now, since it appears to be non-notable original research created by the same user who has been a bit spammy with links to his own Ajax-technology-related company. Once the VfD is complete, if the article is deleted, we should be sure to restore the section back to its2322222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222rewww44444444444444444444444444444444444 I think we should add a link to Ajax framework under the technology section, i'm guessing many searches will want to go here as well as the main ajax programming page Evanreiser 17:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A species of sauropod

There is a subspecies of Apatosaurus called A. ajax. Would it be appropriate to add that to the list? -Dipstikk

Probably, seeing as it's named after the Greek Ajax. I've added it. --Piet Delport 04:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page direction

It would seem to me that a search for Ajax should direct to Ajax (mythology), as everything else named Ajax (possible exception of Ajax the Lesser was named after him...? Do I have conventions wrong? X.spasitel 19:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It all depends on what a reader expects to find -- and I would be surprised if even a majority of our readers have ever even head of the mythological character. Being the "originator" certainly adds weight, but it is not the whole answer. Find out more at Wikipedia:Disambiguation (where they do the case for Mercury). Ewlyahoocom 03:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the modern digital world, it is also likely that the user is searching for the programming topic. Chess2021 (talk) 18:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect?

Why does it redirect to the programming language? It's not even a very common language. I'd have thought that the football club (Dutch), a disambig to all such football clubs or even the cleaning product would be higher profile than some programming language?--Xania ^talk 23:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ajax (lower case) is not a redirect. AJAX (all caps) does redirect to the programming topic, but appears to be the only entity on the disambiguation page that might typically be spelled with all caps. Also, it is not a language, but is a rather widely used group of web development methods. Are any of the football clubs typically spelled in all caps? None of the articles indicate this. FWIW, I don't care much whether AJAX redirect to the programming topic or to the disambiguation page, but looking at the edit history for AJAX, it appears to be somewhat controversial, so I would advise against making changes without broad support. older ≠ wiser 00:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Αἴας" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Αἴας. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 5#Αἴας until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Ajax (Disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Ajax (Disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24#Ajax (Disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 08:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]