Talk:Dakota

On boldface

I recognize that the policy for disambiguation pages does not include the use of boldface in the individual enteries. In that case of Dakota, however, I think it is appropriate because the page is longer than many disambiguation pages, making it more difficult for the reader to quickly find the entery she is looking for. Adding the boldface enables the reader to quickly find the appropriate meaning of Dakota, which, after all, is the point of a disambiguation page. In this, the use of boldface is supported by Wikipedia:Ignore all rules; boldface may not follow the typical format, but it does make the page more useful. --Badger151 05:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore all rules could of course support that, but it doesn't make it wise. Your colleagues have decided that in this case the rule is wiser; your disagreement is likely to reflect misunderstanding of how Dabs work.
--Jerzy•t 22:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two young actresses

I've removed the 2-entry "People" section, in the belief neither of these professionals has achieved the recognizability of Cher, Madonna, Elvis, Bono, Sting, or even Liza, Janice or Judy. Since their fans may believe without evidence that one of the two (but certainly not the other!) is the biggest star of the moment (if not the biggest since Michelangelo), prudence will require reliable and convincing references before either can be restored. In the meantime, the lk to Dakota (given name) provides a low-clutter life raft for the one or two users (among the multitudes who don't know who is meant when "Dakota" is the name someone drops) who imagine that it's important that they become that much hipper.
--Jerzy•t 21:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]