Talk:Jane Green

Please show me where this is considered to be the proper style. And where adding additional information like I did, and like you also reverted, is not considered proper style for these things. IMHO detailed disambigs are much, much more useful than the bland link-name-only version. If there is a style page that shows me wrong, very well. But IMHO your style is much less useful than the version I did. There's also the fact that I have been editing many, many of these short disambig pages to be more detailed. If I am doing things wrong, it would be good to know so that I can make adjustments in my editing style. - TexasAndroid 20:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, finding it myself, the answer appears to be somewhere in the middle. Your comment is right that the full link title should be shown. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages). I cannot find a line that says it expressly, but all the examples show it your way.

On the other hand, there is nothing I can see that says that we should not add descriptive comments after the listings. So your reverting of me focused on one thing I did improper, and undid everything else I did that was proper. Very much overkill, IMHO. I will reinstate my change, but will address your concerns. I do wish tht, if in the future you have a problem with only a part of a edit, you do not blindly revert the entire edit, throwing out the good with the bad. - TexasAndroid 20:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]