Talk:Animalia

Redirect
I have no problem redirecting Animalia to Animal ... as long as the search problem is solved.

Consider this situation:
 * A user wants to find the book Animalia on wikipedia.
 * The user types in "Animalia" and presses "Search". Dozens (hundreds) of pages appear, and none of them are the book.

If there are only two entries in Wikipedia that start with the word "Animalia", shouldnt they both appear at the top of the search results?

Why is Animalia (book) not returned by search?

The top search result is Animalia ... and under that is some fine print that says "for the book see Anamaila Book". But how does the user get to that book? Clicking on the "Book" fine print does not take the user anywhere.

If someone can suggest a way to get the Book entry up near the top of the search-results page, Id be happy to leave the Animalia entry as a redirect to Animal.


 * I agree that the search function should return Animalia (book) near the top. It's a computer, and computer functions can't reason.


 * But as I mentioned below, the policy on this matter is unambiguous. Because, in Wikipedia and elsewhere, the primary meaning of "animalia" is the kingdom of life, the article Animalia should be for the kingdom of life.  Dablinks were created for just this situation: most people are interested in the kingdom of life, but a user interested in the book will search for "animalia", will be directed to "animal", will see the link to Animalia (book), will click on it, and will be directed to the page for the book.  Since dablinks are prominantly placed at the top of the page, indented and italicized, I don't really understand your objection.  bcasterlinetalk 17:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Animalia: this word has at least two meanings:


 * The animal kingom Animal
 * A book called "Animalia" Animalia (book)

The animal kingdom entry used be under Animalia but it was changed to Animal a long time ago.

Yet many entries about taxonomy (species) still contain internal links to Animalia ... those should be updated to point to Animal. Is there a tool (robot) to do that?

I wrote the book entry Animalia (book). The problem I'm having is that if we leave the old Animalia link as a redirect to Animal then no one will ever find the book entry. Specifically: doing a wiki Search operation on "Animalia" will not show the book entry (hundreds of taxonomy and species search results hide the book entry, if the book entry is there: Ive never seen it).

Let me repeat that: doing a search on the book's title does not return the book's entry!

So, my suggestion is the following:
 * Leave the Animal and Animalia (book) pages alone
 * Leave Animalia as a disambiguation page
 * Someone who has power to run tools should globally replace Animalia links to point to Animal

I understand that animal/species are much more frequently used than the book, but there has to be some way to get the book entry to show up when someone does a Search operation on the book's name!!!


 * The page naming conventions at Disambiguation are pretty clear: "When the primary meaning for a term or phrase is well known (indicated by a majority of links in existing articles, and by consensus of the editors of those articles), then use that topic for the title of the main article, with a disambiguation link at the top." In this case, Animalia links in existing articles are exclusively for the animal kingdom. I'm reverting back to the redirect: people searching for Animalia will come across the kingdom of life with a link at the top for the book.  bcasterlinetalk 23:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I completely support that. The otheruses4 is clear enough to point a reader to the article describing the book. --Eleassar my talk 09:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

--

I put in an entry for a book named "Animalia" many, many months ago: Animalia (book). Originally I put a link to it on this Animalia page ... the link is gone. Why?

What about a disambiguation page for Animalia? The link to the book could go there.

When you search for "Animalia" does the book get returned? no. When you visit the Animalia page, does the book get mentioned? No. Visiting the Animalia page redirects you to Animal. Does the Animal page mention the book? No. But, oh boy, the Animal page does link to a a disamibiguation page that may or may not mention the book. Why is a book named Animalia disambiguated from the Animal page? Animal and Animalia may be synonyms in biology, but the ARE NOT synonyms of the book Animalia. The book Animalia should be mentioned (a link is okay) on the Animalia page. So I put one there. Guaranteed: someone will remove it. Dear biology people: There is more in the world than biology and taxonomy. Yes, there are books and music, too!! And other things! A book named Animalia DOES NOT belong on the Animal page!!!!! It belongs here.

I dont really care how the Animalia page is formatted; and certainly the book is much less important than the animal kingdom; so if some wiki guru wants to reformat this page, go ahead. But it is not sensible to put a book called Animalia under a page called Animal.


 * I'm sure sooner or later someone will redirect Animalia to Animal. So you could use the redirect template on the Animal page. --Eleassar my talk 10:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)