Talk:D with stroke (disambiguation)

Older discussions
&Eth; and Đ are two different characters, as described in the disambiguation article.

However, the disambiguation article uses the Eth codepoint as the address.

-- Zhen Lin 14:32, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. Does &amp;ETH; -- Ð map uniformly to &amp;#272; -- Đ? They look exactly the same to me, but it occurs to me that this might not be the case. --Shallot 15:14, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * No. For me, the bar in &#272; is placed higher than the bar in &ETH;. Kairos 10:01, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * I think the bar in &#272; is supposed to be in the vertical middle. Is that so on your display? --Shallot 14:13, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * Not quite. The bar in &#272; is placed slightly above the middle on my display. It's fairly difficult to notice, but when you look at them side-by-side, it's apparent. Maybe it's just my font. Kairos 13:21, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * In my font &#272; is also narrower, FYI 202.180.83.6 05:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

The Faroese name of ð is edd, not "edh" (or eð)

see:
 * W.B. Lockwood: An Introduction to Modern Faroese Tórshavn 1977
 * Chr. Matras: Føroysk-Donsk Orðabók Tórshavn 1977 (Faroese-Danish Dictionary)

Arne List 11:20, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Restructuring
I propose following:
 * 1) Moving D with stroke to Đ, as Eth and others are not d with stroke in lowercase, but are Đ in upercase
 * 2) Moving Đ (slavic letter) to D with stroke
 * 3) Mergeing info on Vietnamese, Northern Sami, and Skolt Sami usage of the letter from (new) Đ disambig page to (new) D with stroke and leaving just a short note on Đ article that D with stroke is used in some Slavic languages, some Sami languages and Vietnamese language (because it is a disambig page)

My oppinion is that's waaay better organisation because now D with stroke links to letters whose lowercase is ð or ɖ, which is sipmly not d with stroke, and Đ is redirecting to Eth. I think Đ has to be disambig page linking to Eth, D with stroke and others.


 * support
 * 1) Dijxtra 19:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Although I think it's better to move the merged article to Đ because Eth uses a different codepoint, thus "Đ" does not really refer to eth. DHN 19:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


 * oppose
 * 1) "D with stroke" is an English title; "Đ" is not.  Michael Z. 2006-01-17 01:05 Z
 * 2) Oppose: agree with Mzajac. Jonathunder 19:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


 * comments

Doesn't look quite right to me:
 * I wouldn't support a move to Đ. How do you pronounce that?  Article titles should comprise English words when possible, certainly not single foreign characters.  Titles are names of things, not the things.
 * Well, there are articles for A, B and so on... so the proposal seems to be consistent with current situation on Wikipedia.
 * In terms of letter-form, the Slavic D-stroke is a modified Latin D, identical to the glyph used in Vietnamese and Sami. The use of these letters in different languages could have separate articles, but I think there should be a single article for the Latin letter D with stroke.
 * We argee on that. I propose D with stroke to be article on all uses of Đ/đ, both slavic and non-slavic.
 * African D and Anglo-Saxon Eth are differently-modified Latin letters, so they should remain as a separate article, as is suggested. —Michael Z. 2006-01-16 19:17 Z 
 * We agree here too, nobody's proposing a merge. Just moving disambiguation page to Đ. --Dijxtra 22:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course there are articles on A and B; those are letters used in the English language, and they appear in English dictionaries. They can spell their own names in English.  But we don't have articles entitled "Þ", "Ж", "香", or "₴" because those titles have no meaning to most English-language readers.  Article titles are names of things, not the things.


 * English readers know how to pronounce "D", but how do you pronounce "Đ"? —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 01:05 Z 
 * What do you call ß and Œ? DHN 04:05, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I call those articles which should be renamed to sharp s or eszett, ethel (letter), and æ to ash (letter). —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 16:18 Z 


 * So, what do you propose? To leave things as they are? Because, current situation seems pretty ugly to me, and introducing Đ article wuold sort the things out (especially if we have ß and Œ precedents). --Dijxtra 07:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * But we also have eth, thorn (letter), wynn, and yogh, which are better examples to follow.


 * I think the Latin D with stroke belongs here, including re-merging the Slavic letter with it. This becomes an article, and eth and African d are moved into its "see also" section.  There is no need for a disambiguation page for this name.  —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 16:18 Z 


 * I disagree. The fact that you find ß and Œ are wrong names is of no importance here - they do exist, and that's all that matters. For the sake of clarity and user-frendliness, I think that the fact that Đ (eth) and Đ (d with stroke) do not have the same UNICODE code should not stop us from making Đ a disambig page. If DHN does not retreat his/her vote, you can try to move this discussion to some more populated place (as Help desk) or just accept the vote count... --Dijxtra 19:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Disambiguation pages are for different subjects that have the same title. "Eth" (ð) and "Latin D with stroke" (đ) do not have the same title, but of course since the letters have similarities, the articles should link to each other.  Unicode code point isn't that important, although titling the articles "Ð" and "Đ" would be doubly confusing.


 * Furthermore, what is the point of a "disambiguation" page whose title is spelled with a D-stroke (Đ)? What are you disambiguating?  If someone links to Eth or African D by the single letter name Ð or Ɖ, those are spelled differently, and there is no need for disambiguation.  —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 20:32 Z 


 * I typed in đ looking for the Slavic letter, but I didn't get any information on. I actually typed in Serbo-Croatian in order to find it. What if I didn't know this letter occured in Serbo-Croatian? I copied it from a Slavic word... -Iopq 02:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * "đ" ought to redirect to D with stroke. Regardless of where you copied it from or what language the text was in, it is unambiguously a particular code point, and should take you to the article on the letter represented by that code point, which explains where it is used.  But as it stands now, pasting that letter in takes you to a disambiguation page, which requires you to read four articles just to figure out what you pasted into the URL.  —Michael Z. 2006-07-15 05:44 Z 

Sneaking it by
I just realized the requested move above hasn't been posted at requested moves. Until that happens, the above vote could be considered suspect. —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 20:37 Z 
 * Well, OK. I'll propose it then, but not my fault if some admin does just one of the proposed and thus makes a bigger mess than currently exists. I just acted in manner of good faith and I get the impression you are trying to bureaucratize and complicate and things just because you don't like the vote count... fine, will get it your way then and see what happens. --Dijxtra 21:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't like the way a vote is being held to move a page without going through the correct procedure to publicize the move. You got that right.  It's not "my way", it's required by Requested moves.  You can propose multiple moves or complex moves there.  Have faith that consensus won't screw it up (it usually doesn't).  —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 23:33 Z 


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was move. I'll leave it to you to sort out the mess, though. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 10:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Requested move
D with stroke → Đ – See here for ongoing discussion.

Voting

 * Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~ 


 * Support Dijxtra 21:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support' —Michael Z. 2006-01-17 23:42 Z 
 * Support DHN 18:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Sounds good to me. Gryffindor  20:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongly OpposeSeptentrionalis 06:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments

While there are four support votes here, there seem to be a varying degree of oppose votes above. Could you please clarify the situation by asking the other people involved in this issue to vote again down here? Thanks. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 21:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Everybody except one person voted here already. --Dijxtra 21:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

ð and đ
Since Ð (ð, eth) and Đ (đ, D with stroke) are two different letters, you can't say “something is the uppercase of several letters”. Please help mofidy this sentence. --Hello World! 15:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * "There are four distincs letters(*) which in uppercase resemble letter Đ:"? (*)or maybe graphemes or glyphs?


 * BTW, I didn't realize that Ð (ð, eth) and Đ (đ, D with stroke) point to different locations. I think they both should point here because very, very, very few people will know the difference before they read this page. The whole point of Wikipedia is in education, so I think that two different Đs pointing to two different places are not a good idea, but two different Đs pointing to one place where the distinction between those two is settled - I find that very good. --Dijxtra 16:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Editors can always use a piped link to point here in a context where they are referring to any D-stroke letter, but if someone typed a link using a particular code-point, I think it's likely that they meant to link to that particular letter. As in many cases, applying judgement, correcting mistakes, and disambiguating a link may be required.  In the end, almost all links to a disambiguation page are supposed to be disambiguated anyway.  —Michael Z. 2006-01-24 18:25 Z 

I don't mean modifying the links. I just want to point out that “Something is uppercase of several letters” is very confusing and is technically incorrect. --Hello World! 03:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. I gave it a shot, but it's still quite awkward.  —Michael Z. 2006-01-25 05:58 Z 


 * Nice shot. --Dijxtra 12:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Removing eth
I think that this page should not include eth, since it uses a different code point, and the Ð (eth) page already redirects there. This Đ uses a different code point and is definitely NOT eth (nor the African D, for that matter). If we are keep the reference to eth, then Ð (eth) should redirect here as well. DHN 06:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * You've got a point... But, I think we need a page that will have all of these listed. So a newbie who doesn't uderstand this UNICODE things can get a full list... --Dijxtra 10:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * We do have such a page, at Đ, and each of the similar-looking letters links to it. Since it is a disambiguation page, we don't want to link to it.  The information that there are similar-looking letters belongs in the respective articles; so D with stroke already links to the others.  There's nothing missing.  —Michael Z. 2006-01-31 16:25 Z 


 * Then shouldn't we redirect Ð (eth) to here since it also looks like this letter?


 * I agree. --Dijxtra 17:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Or does it have some "special" status that it should link directly to eth? This is, after all, the page using the page code for D with stroke, not for eth nor African D. DHN 17:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a disambiguation page; we don't purposely make links to it, except for the disambiguation notices at the tops of some pages where the title may be ambiguous—such a notice is already at the top of "Eth": "For the list of letters that look similar to Ð in uppercase, see Đ". Ð or ð (eth) is unambiguously Eth, so it redirects to that article. For more about disambiguation, read WP:DAB. —Michael Z. 2006-01-31 18:15 Z 

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Đ → D with stroke (disambiguation) — The character Đ (U+0110) is the specific capital for D with stroke. The other characters redirect to the appropriate pages -- Ð (U+00D0) redirects to Eth, Ɖ (U+0189) redirects to African D -- but Đ (U+0110) is a disambiguation page. I propose that the disambiguation page be moved elsewhere and Đ (U+0110) be made into a redirect to D with stroke. Ptcamn 16:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Add  # Support   or   # Oppose   on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~ .  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

 * 1) Support: I'd rather see the other Đ's redirected to the disambiguation page. But if that doesn't happen, then it's only fair to redirect the D with stroke page to its appropriate article. DHN 17:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support per my last edit to this page. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments:

Just a comment for now: I don't mind the present situation of Đ pointing to a disambiguation page, because this is the generic Latin character, and may purposely or accidentally be used to represent either Eth or the African D with stroke.

I think a written-out English title like D with stroke (disambiguation) would be an improvement, though. Perhaps even better would be a disambiguation page D with stroke, and moving the current D with stroke to a more specific title Latin D with stroke.

Remember that Đ, Ð, and Ɖ are just redirects and should usually not appear as links on the page anyway, so it's not worth getting too worked up about the question. Cheers. —Michael Z. 2007-04-02 18:23 Z 


 * I don't think Đ actually is the generic Latin character, and shouldn't be purposely used to represent Eth or African D. If anything capital Eth would be used, since it's present in Latin-1 and Windows-1252 etc. --Ptcamn 18:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request.