Talk:Plano-convex
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Deletion proposed, since Wikipedia:Naming conventions (adjectives) discourages articles on adjectives. The alternative would be to convert this to a disambiguation page that links to each type of plano-convex object. Really, any link most links to here should go to either wiktionary:plano-convex, or Lens (optics)#Types of lenses.--Srleffler 05:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- But that discouragement is not absolute; sexagesimal, for example. The real objection here would be that this is a dicdef; and I think the sentence on Sumerian plano-convex bricks (which needs expansion badly) makes it more than that. I am taking out the {{prod}} and will consider restructuring as a dab. Septentrionalis 14:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, as used in that article sexagesimal is a noun (whether or not this is correct English). For example, "Sexagesimal was not a pure base 60 system..." I'm not sure that the mudbrick line is enough to save this. It's not clear, for example, whether one would call these mudbricks plano-convexes, or plano-convex mudbricks. If the latter, then this article is not appropriate, per the naming convention on adjectives. I'll try converting to a disambig and see how that looks.--Srleffler 01:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- almost all may be a better example; but I like your dab page, even if I did fiddle with it. Septentrionalis 00:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that "almost all" is technically an adjective either, but I certainly agree with your point that there are clearly exceptions to the rule. I'm fine with unmasking the links. I normally do this on disambig pages too, but hesitated here because one of the links goes to a specific section. --Srleffler 05:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- almost all may be a better example; but I like your dab page, even if I did fiddle with it. Septentrionalis 00:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, as used in that article sexagesimal is a noun (whether or not this is correct English). For example, "Sexagesimal was not a pure base 60 system..." I'm not sure that the mudbrick line is enough to save this. It's not clear, for example, whether one would call these mudbricks plano-convexes, or plano-convex mudbricks. If the latter, then this article is not appropriate, per the naming convention on adjectives. I'll try converting to a disambig and see how that looks.--Srleffler 01:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)