Talk:Cord

The top portion of this entry looks like a dictionary entry. -- Allyunion 21:52, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

How should the first section read?
"Cord" is a fairly common term with a couple-few common meanings. Historically, these meanings have been at the top, as is proper, because why make a person sift thru a lot of extremely obscure meanings to find hot to get to the "Power cord" article or whatever.

I think the stable version was this:

Cord or CORD may refer to: * Cord (unit), a unit of measurement for firewood and pulpwood used in North America * Electrical cable, in electronics ** Extension cord ** Power cord * String (structure) made of multiple strands twisted together, or      ** thin rope Cord or CORD may also refer to...

Which is not ideal but does do this. A couple editors, User:Clarityfiend and User:Wire723, made some changes and we ended up with this up top:

Cord or CORD may refer to: == Common meanings == * Cord (sewing), a decorative trim made of strands of yarn twisted together * Cord (unit), a unit of measurement for firewood and pulpwood

Which, the creation of the "Common meanings" header and section IMO is an excellent idea. The problem is, I don't agree that those two are the two most common meanings. I don't think the sewing thing is, for sure. So, what are the most common meanings?


 * A subset of "Rope"; a thin rope
 * Electrical cords, power cords etc.
 * Cord of wood
 * Spinal cord

Those four seem like the best, to me. Then it falls off. You could certainly add "Umbilical cord". Possibly you could include the Cord, a somewhat famous automobile, and the Corduroy thing, and the sewing thing, but I wouldn't. Four or five is a good number, got to cut off somewhere. OK? Thoughts? Herostratus (talk) 11:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm ok with reinstating the electrical cable items (as an aside, cord in this context is American English – British English uses "lead" or "cable"). The articles String (structure) and Rope use the word "cord" without defining it, so they are less useful. Wire723 (talk) 11:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm not a supporter of adding electrical cable. It is a type of cord (and not even a WP:partial title match), but that's not what a dab page is for. In fact, the word "cord" is used only twice in that article, neither time in reference to electrical cable itself. Spinal cord is also a partial, and hardly ever (never?), AFAIK, referred to just as cord. Strings are definitely not cords; they're thinner. The wording in the article shows that the two are considered distinct and separate: "A drawstring ... is a string, cord, lace, or rope ...", "A pullstring ... is a string, cord, or chain ..." and "They typically consist of a pair of strings or cords ..." The sewing term is unknown outside sewing circles. Finally, rope itself states that it is not cord right away in the second sentence: "Rope is thicker and stronger than similarly constructed cord, string, and twine." Clarityfiend (talk) 19:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * A case I had in mind is an American reader researching a replacement cord for their toaster or whatever, who comes here because they don't know we use the "power" prefix. Wire723 (talk) 12:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If "Rope is thicker and stronger than similarly constructed cord, string, and twine", the the difference between rope and cord is thickness (and strength, which essentially derives from that). And this is true. So, let's see. "a rope, but thinner" or "A thin rope" seems correct. It depends on whether people who search on "cord" are looking for "rope", or would benefit from being sent to the Rope article, which in the 2nd sentence does kind of describe what a cord is. My guess (no way to know) is that enough people are to make it worthwhile to put it up top. "A thin ropelike object" if you prefer highfalutin talk, or something like that.


 * Spinal cord, good point, but "cord" alone is used for umbilical cord -- "cut the cord" and so on. Huh -- cut what cord? Well if you don't know you'll come to this page. So maybe umbilical cord should be up top. It'll also have to go in the "Medical" section, but providing multiple ways to engage is good interface design. For the electrical things, well extension cord is a subset of power cords, so you don't really need that, and there are many articles on power cables (Electrical cable, Power cable, Coaxial cable, undersea cable) so you could just send the reader to Cable which is a dab. Thus maybe "Power cord or other electrical cable". That is unusual, two links in one entry, and probably not that helpful -- a person searching on "cord" will not likely go to Cable first (a few might); their best path forward is probably to go to "Power cord" and thrash around from there until the get what they want, I guess. So really just "Power cord" should do there. This would give:


 * Thin rope
 * Power cord
 * Cord (unit) used for measuring wood
 * Umbilical cordHerostratus (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No recent discussion, I went ahead and implemented thisHerostratus (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)