Talk:WWI (disambiguation)

HTML comments
You asked: "why do people keep removing html comments? if you've verified that the comment no longer applies, then please say so". I removed the comment "not common at all" because it's irrelevant. An entry doesn't have to be common to appear on a disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:46, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, in principle, that's true: if an obscure topic has an obscure alternative name, we disambiguate, no matter how obscure the topic or how obscure the name. But here we've got an abbreviation that's just mentioned in a long list article. And because anyone can come up with an abbreviation for anything, we need to know an abbreviation has some currency before adding it to dab pages and lists. We're not a dictionary of abbreviations, as pointed out in the DAB guidelines themselves. The point of the comment was this: the abbreviation may not be common enough, so the case needs investigating. If you have investigated the case, and have concluded that the abbreviation is common enough to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia – then say so in the edit summary while removing it. And if you, on the other hand, believe the html comment to be complete bollocks, then you will probably not feel any inclination to explain your actions (nobody likes making long explanations for simple removals of complete bollocks), but it would still be helpful to others if you say that you believe that to be complete bollocks. – Uanfala (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The place to question whether the initialism is used in on the talk page of the list article, not in hidden comments on the disambiguation page. Such comments nothing have no use on a disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 22:53, 10 January 2021 (UTC)