Talk:Delphic (disambiguation)

Primary topic??
My long-standing reading of Dab guidelines is that the only presumption re equal disabiguation is that it applies in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Further, i've construed that for about a dozen years to imply a mandate for renaming the article bearing the unqualified title, no matter how long it has been primary by default, in the absence of an explicit reason for overriding the eq-Dabn presumption, and i can't recall that construction being challenged. --Jerzy•t 03:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Your edit left no link at all from dab page to renamed band -please fix. Have you also sorted out any incoming links? (Can't check, on mobile). Pam D  07:36, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the first of those two matters was the next wiki-thing i attended to after pinging you, but at leisure i'll look at the chronology more specifically. ...Time is the Simplest Thing, and the simplest are the most confusing for me. --Jerzy•t 12:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I can now check: there are 50+ incoming links which now point to the dab page. To remedy the situation slightly I have added a link to the band from the dab page. Please now fix all the links intended for the band which now point to the dab page. Your point about "equal disambiguation" may or may not be general policy, but it is certainly very wrong to damage the encyclopedia by moving an article to a new title and removing it from the disambiguation page, making many links point to the dab page and making the band impossible to find by its title. Please take more care while implementing your ideas about dab pages. Pam  D  08:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed it slipped my mind (the occasion not having arisen for some time) to do what i routinely expect to, and i'm grateful to be reminded.
 * I think the task has been stated by some as the subject of a "Code of Honor", and in my opinion that is
 * (a) a respectable attitude in those who subscribe to it, and
 * (b) on the other hand, evidence that your didactic tone on this talk page (which i would find appropriate, were you enunciating a matter of policy, and requiring no response if made on my own or your talk page) is out of sync with the WP ethos, and unconstructive; i consider it the case, on this article talk page, that i'm obligated to remark on it as an irregularity.
 * Thank you for your attention --Jerzy•t 12:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)