Talk:Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex* (*But Were Afraid to Ask)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex* (*But Were Afraid to Ask) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:14, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the move request was: pages moved, dab page created. Apparently uncontroversial. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:16, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

dab category

Given the desire for a manual disambiguation page, is there any way to include it in the disambiguation pages category? Berek (talk) 14:46, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, but wasn't able to make that happen by any method I know how. So for the moment, I've had to add the page to Category:Temporary maintenance holdings, because the lack of a dab template on it is causing it to get picked up by the tools that detect uncategorized articles — so it needs to stay in that category until somebody figures out how to get it properly included in the dab page categories. My question, however, is this: is there any reason why the asterisk actually has to be present in the title of the dab page at all? Couldn't we just elide the damn thing and leave the title as "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid to Ask)" so that we can just handle this like a normal dab page instead? Bearcat (talk) 01:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's the actual title of the book, so with the asterisks would be preferable. OTOH I don't have a huge problem if we have the dab without the asterisks so long as there's a redirect from the full name (right now the redirect goes the other way). Perhaps a note explaining that the name is due to technical issues (like on C Sharp (programming language), for example), would be appropriate. On second thought, let’s just go ahead and swap the redirect and dab and get it done with, this is hardly worth spending a lot more time on. Does that have to be done as a move by an admin over the existing redirect? Rwessel (talk) 07:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've also left a note over at Template talk:Disambiguation Rwessel (talk) 07:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dab with two entries

I think we have to read WP:TWODABS and we hould avoid creating a dab page with only two entries. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:2DABS: "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, but per the criteria at Is there a primary topic? there is no primary topic, then the base name should lead the reader to the disambiguation page for the term." That's true in this case. Also, this name was the name of one of the two articles before, so it's hard to say where this should redirect to, if it were just a redirect. Rwessel (talk) 00:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rwessel is correct about this. TWODABS does not apply in cases where a primary topic cannot be determined, such that both topics will have to be located at disambiguated titles and the plain version would land nowhere. If one is clearly primary topic and the other is not, then we can absolutely just hatnote instead of creating a dab page — but in this case, it is necessary for the plain title to be a dab page since neither topic can really claim "main title" primacy over the other. Bearcat (talk) 16:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]