Talk:ATP

Redirect to Adenosine triphosphate
I restored the redirect to Adenosine triphosphate. Not only does it not make sense for x to redirect to x (disambiguation), if someone wishes to change this redirect, he should also change the many articles which link to ATP expecting Adenosine triphosphate. &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 20:56, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
 * There is no way this deserves primary meaning status. It is a technical term known only to scientists. The links will all be fixed over time. Piccadilly 11:18, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The tennis usage is almost certainly the best known among the general population. Scranchuse 19:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree, every high school biology student in the world learns at least what ATP is used for, and its importance in the body. I also disagree with the fact that the tennis term is the better known, although obviously neither claim can be proven.  I think ATP is an important enough molecule, and that it is used in common vernacular enough to deserve primary meaning.  Seeing as how two in a row don't agree though, I won't change it for now, at least until we get some more who agree with making adenosine triphosphate the primary. D-rew 13:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with D-rew. ATP is tought in highschools worldwide, it is as basic as DNA. Tennis has much less fans compared to football, basketball, hockey etc. So unlike NFL, NBA or NHL, the ATP makes much less people to think about the sport related to it. And when thinking of tennis, Australian Open, Wimbledon or U.S. Open is more associated to it than ATP. Timur lenk 20:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with D-rew. ATP is one of the more fundamental things that any student will learn about in secondary school. Honestly, I'd never heard about the tennis association until now. Considering how the popularity of tennis is very regional compared to the worldwide nature of adenosine triphosphate I think this page should direct to adenosine triphosphate. --Tunheim 11:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with the three users above me and the original poster; I cannot conceive that the tennis ATP would be searched for more than Adenosine triphosphate. I, too, had never heard of this "Association of Tennis Professionals" prior to viewing this page. I would definitely support moving the contents of this page to ATP (disambiguation) and redirecting ATP to Adenosine triphosphate. The dab page can easily be linked to from there via a hatnote at the top of the page. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 06:12, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You are commenting on a six year old discussion. Since then, this redirect has been discussed several times, the one of which I can easily locate is as an alternative on a move request, but other discussions had the same result. While adenosine triphosphate is probably the most common use of the term, the requirement for a primary topic is that it is "much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined". I've been disambiguating this term for more than a year now, and in my personal experience it is not. Not being a tennis enthusiast I was just as surprised. --Muhandes (talk) 09:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I can read timestamps. I was merely putting down my views on the matter, regardless of past consensus. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Link to Automated Theorem Proving
I thought that it would be a good idea to mention that ATP is an abbreviation for Automated Theorem Proving within Computer Science and Mathematics.

I have added it to this disambiguation page at this time. If anyone has any problems with this, please discuss before removal.

Note: A quote from the wiki-page for automated theorem proving contains the referred to abbreviation: "Automated theorem proving (ATP) or automated deduction, currently the most well-developed subfield of automated reasoning (AR), is the proving of mathematical theorems by a computer program."

ConcernedScientist 14:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Requested move
A request has been made to move Adenosine triphosphate to ATP. See Talk:Adenosine triphosphate/Archives/ 1. --Una Smith (talk) 17:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Another request: Adenosine triphosphate → ATP —(Discuss) --Una Smith (talk) 17:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Allmänna tilläggspensionen
Gentlemen, why doesn't it exist a (at least explanation) to tilläggspensionen? Because it does not exist yet(only on swedish wikipedia)? Think about one thing, most people in the world has limited or no understanding of swedish. If the article is missing, I can take on myself to create it. Gsmgm (talk) 08:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Please do create it! - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Underway, I'll just get my darned physics test over first. Gsmgm (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Trim and cleanup
I greatly trimmed the list of disambiguation entries. I know that it is becoming common to put any possible acronym for a Wikipedia article on a disambiguation page. However, this is usually not helpful. Almost all of such entries are found in their unabbreviated form when the term is first used. Later, the abbreviated form may or may not be commonly used. It is often dependent on how long the unabbreviated term is and how formal the context is. Anyway, if disambiguation page entries virtually always use the unabbreviated form before using an abbreviated form, there is no reason to list them on a disambiguation page for abbreviations. A visitor would have both the full name and the acronym for such a term. I know that the average person is not that bright, but I think that he or she is smart enough to either type the full name into the URL box or search for it using the search box on the right upper corner of every page.

There are so many terms, names and organizations that could be abbreviated ATP, and other short abbreviations, that if the disambiguation page include every possible term, it would be made far more difficult to use, and also less useful. The disambiguation page becomes less useful because a person would be less likely to find the correct entry on a disambiguation page because the glut of unnecessary entries would make it difficult for him or her to figure out which entry is correct because there would be so many similar entries to the correct one on disambiguation pages with short abbreviations. For example, in a medical journal whose readers are physicians, an article may use an abbreviation that virtually all physicians understand and that is never given in its unabbreviated form in the article or used a second time. On a proper disambiguation page, it should be relatively easy for someone to identify what term the article was referring to, if it has an article or is so obviously important that it has a red link on the disambiguation page. However, if Wikipedians have filled the disambiguation page with a large number of terms that are not usually given as simply an abbreviation, the meanings of the correct entries and one or more unnecessary entries may be too close for the visitor to tell which entry is the correct one. Continuing the example, based on the context, the person may be able to tell that the abbreviation in the medical journal refers to a chemical. Unfortunately, the disambiguation page has two unnecessary entries that could be a fit along with the correct entry.

I am not blaming anyone who worked on the old disambiguation page because the practice of adding any possible article that could have an acronym to a disambiguation page for acronyms has become the norm on Wikipedia, so people simply build up disambiguation pages. They were all trying to help the project. Even some Wikipedia Manual of Style articles need to be updated, in my opinion, to address this issue. From what I have skimmed, the policy pages do not really have anything pertinent. -- Kjkolb (talk) 04:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Your opinion seems to be in the minority - the list is slowly being built up again by a number of different editors. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

" A T P " = all tests passed
in common use in AT&T, former Bell System telecommunications companies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.23.5.10 (talk) 00:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)