Talk:Big Three

Big three of science fiction

Forgetting this big three of science fiction: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Arthur_C._Clarke + Heinlein + Asimov —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.13.82 (talk) 03:23, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup needed

This disambig page badly needs cleanup, since right now it's basically a collection of trivia. A cleanup though is going to require the deletion of a large portion of the article (50-90%). Before I proceed, does anyone have any objections? If so, let's talk about them here. Otherwise I'm going to take a machete to this page. --El on

I may be being stupid or lazy to say so, but someone really should write the article on the big three of SF. I didn't have the heart to delete such an enticing dead link.Thaddeus Slamp (talk) 00:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ka 08:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup in process, though there are a lot of redirects to fix as well. Also, for future reference: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Big Three on one of the alternate forms. --El on ka 01:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how the old information was "trivia". I think it should be restored. The term "big three" has a lot of meanings in different contexts. This page should reflect that, and not be a short list just for the sake of being short. —Pengo 13:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Related AfDs

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Big Three
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big three (Oakland A's Pitchers) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elonka (talk • contribs) 22:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

I just stripped everything out that didn't specifically refer to "Big Three". Anything being added back in should include a WP:reliable source showing it referred to that way. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Bulls

Jordan, Pippen and Rodman. Why aren´t in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.216.186 (talk) 14:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Entries that only list the three members

Disambiguation pages typically offer a single link for each variation of an ambiguous term e.g. Big Three. Disambiguation pages are not meant to define the term, or just listing the three members in this case, without providing an article about the specific Big Three group. This was the consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation/Archive_25#dab_page_for_neologism_of_multiple_sports_teams. If there are no objections, the entries that only list the members should be removed.—Bagumba (talk) 06:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to apply to this addition of record labels. There needs to be a single page that covers this particular three.—Bagumba (talk) 05:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Big Three in tennis

@Bagumba: Regarding the Big Three in tennis, I refer to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Disambiguation_pages#Items_appearing_within_other_articles that an entry is totally appropriate. The concept of Big Three is not only mentioned in the Big Four (tennis) article, but can be considered fully covered there (just extract some 75% of the information). The "See also" section and the entry Big Four there is just about similar subsumptions with other numbers and does nothing for the user searching the actually existing concept Big Three in tennis. --KnightMove (talk) 14:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the entry with a redirect Big Three (tennis). I also believe it is a valid entry on this page. ~ GB fan 14:40, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@KnightMove: No problem. It wasn't obvious to me in your original edit that Big Three details would be in the Big Four article. I'm okay with the latest update. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and United Airlines are known as the big three legacy airlines

American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and United Airlines are referred to as the big three legacy airlines or the US3 within the aviation industry. Jplatts (talk) 21:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]