Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation/Fixing links

What is the point of this tag? Wouldn't it be easier to make the disambig than add the tag? Smartyshoe 15:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sometimes you don't know which disambig to use. This tag is very helpful and draws the attention of editors who may know the proper usage.  Hoof Hearted 14:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Difficult to understand
This is written on a couple of different levels: for the novice mixed up with the established editor. It's confusing. A template links to this. It should be written so someone can read it, understand it, use it. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 04:43, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've only glanced at this in the past; you're right, it's a mess. I'll have a bit of a stab at it. Josh Parris 05:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I took a second stab at it, reorganizing, trimming here, expanding there. --Una Smith (talk) 18:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It still needs a lot of work, imo, however it won't send editors running for cover in the first sentence, and that's a mighty improvement. I can't follow the second instruction at all, and I can't correct it because I'm uncertain what you're trying to say. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 18:58, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Revised some more. --Una Smith (talk) 20:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, usable instructions. Thx. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 00:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I think the essential and unstated issue of concern here is that normally the tag dn is used by editors who have already tried to fix the link and cannot fix it from context alone. Josh Parris proposes another use of the tag, namely to tag any link to a dab page, not just the ones that are hard to fix. --Una Smith (talk) 23:53, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well spotted problem. Perhaps to use another template for the bot, with a different help page? Josh Parris 00:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Which template
dn is used on about 3500 articles and is viewed 50% more than ambiguous link, which is used on 2 articles. Neither template is viewed more than 2 or 3 times per day. I am okay with dropping all mention of ambiguous link. --Una Smith (talk) 15:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Instructions need to be "new-to-dab" simple.
I like the new process, but if I were to come here mostly-ignorant of what a dab page is, I would be a bit clueless. I think the instructions need to assume the reader doesn't know what a dab page is. I'll update the instructions when I have time to do so with a reasonable level of quality. Feel free to beat me to it! (John User:Jwy talk) 18:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Suggested change
How's this? My additions in italics.

You may have come to this page as the result of following a superscript link that looks similar to this:


 * link[disambiguation needed]

The superscript is generated by a dn tag, like this: link. That tag is used to mark a link that needs to be fixed because it goes to a disambiguation page. In many cases, a link directly to a specific article would better. This is a short guide to fixing these links.


 * The preceding unsigned text contained in its example a life template with side-effect. I replaced that with a fake. Same look and link, but no side-effect. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 19:23, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

How to fix a link

 * 1) If the tagged link does not go to a disambiguation page, delete the tag - nothing more needs to be done.
 * 2) In the unusual case that it is appropriate to point to the disambiguation page, simply remove the dn tag.
 * 3) If the tagged link goes to a disambiguation page (as it should), examine the articles listed on that disambiguation page to help you decide what article should be used how to fix the link .  You may also need to do some research outside of Wikipedia.  See example below.
 * 4) If you cannot determine which is the appropriate article, consider leaving a message on a related WikiProject talk page and leave the tag in place.
 * 5) Replace Fix the link so it points to the new article and delete the dn tag.  Piping can be used to change the link target but keep the text to improve the readability of the article.
 * 6) Consider using an edit summary like this:
 * Repairing link to disambiguation page - You can help!

No appropriate link
The instructions fail to consider the possibility that an appropriate article does not yet exist on Wikipedia. There should be instructions on what to do. For example, There is currently a link to the Hydration disambiguation page from Marsileaceae (a group of ferns) becuase the article discusses the activation of spores when the spore tissues "hydrate". However, there is no appropriate article listed at Hydration, nor could I find one. The closest possibility is the article on Dehydration, but that article is a medical article focussing solely on a human medical condition and not on the general process in biology. There really ought to be a separate article on hydration as a signal for breaking dormancy or cryptobiosis, or perhaps a general article on the necessity of homeosmotic equilibrium in living tissues.

So, the option to create a new article for a missing topic should be discussed in the template use instructions. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)