Talk:Dash (disambiguation)

Street Fighter

I removed

Several Street Fighter video games, in which the word "Dash" spelled with the prime symbol is included in the Japanese logos:
- Street Fighter II ′ (Dash): Champion Edition
- Street Fighter II ′ (Dash) Turbo: Hyper Fighting
- Street Fighter Zero 2 ′ (Dash) (home version of Street Fighter Zero 2 Alpha, released overseas as Street Fighter Alpha 2 Gold)

for lack of any suggestion of support in the article for the idea that anyone says "Dash", without (by mentioning a fuller name for the game first) having made its meaning too clear for anyone too look up "Dash" in WP to learn more abt the game. If you find any evidence to the contrary, you still should study MoSDab and Dab before putting any of this back, and find a way clarifying the relationship to "dash" other than by falsifying the title by using

′ (Dash)

--Jerzy•t 19:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I was cleaning up the page, I got to that part and couldn't understand what the heck it was talking about, so I just figured it made sense to people who knew about those games and left it there. Obviously, I don't mind it being removed, either. Propaniac (talk) 19:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dash first?

However, I absolutely don't see the point in prefacing each of the acronym entries with "DASH," as it just clutters the page with "DASH DASH DASH DASH DASH" down the row. I don't believe the MOS includes any indication that that's necessary; it DOES indicate, in general, that the wikilink should begin each entry. (And MOS:DP#Synonyms specifically indicates that entries like "Dash, sprint (race)" have no need for the "Dash" preface.

I also don't see the point in listing every single locomotive here, instead of just linking to the page about the Dash series. Again, it clutters the page, and it's unlikely that someone entering Dash would expect to find a specific locomotive on this page.

While I respect your efforts to follow guidelines, I don't think you've followed the intentions or the spirit of the MOS and your edits have made the page more cluttered and difficult to use. I'm bringing this up here as a courtesy instead of just reverting them. Propaniac (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps i am adhering to an obsoleted provision; i haven't been diligent in following the evolution. However, no one has said that to me before, and i have frequently made such changes.
--Jerzy•t 20:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oddly enuf, the example at MOS:DP#Piping not only supports my style, but does it in a way the echoes my entry
* DASH, Mega Man Legends video-game series

--Jerzy•t 20:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lists

The purpose of a "dash" Dab is to get users to articles that could have been the articles that could have been named "Dash" and have encyclopedic info they were seeking. Dict defs do not belong on the Dab page, nor do lks to articles that simply mention "dash" without offering at least a decent-sized section on the sense of "dash" in question. I removed the lk to the list of GE locomotives on that basis, but substituted lks to all of the many articles on that list that might be applicable. I've got a lawn to mow, or i might have gone back while i had the momentum, and put three links, each to a section in the locomotive list article, as encyclopedic coverage of the series (tho the list doesn't have encyclopedic info on individual models); if you're interested in that, see URL anchor notation. I don't blame anyone who prefers to wait for a railroader to come by and consider the task worthwhile.
There're also two more questions abt those entries:

I stuck "Dash" in front of the titles that aren't so piped on the list; maybe those entries should be dropped, on the logic that "dash" names their series but not the individual model.
I preferred to err in favor of retention, accepting as if uncritically the implicit assertion that a write might, say, refer to "an 8-40CM" in one 'graph and "the Dash" in the next one; if that's not plausible, then the Dab entry for that model is ill-founded.

Better informed editors than i should weight those issues.
--Jerzy•t 20:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

If you'll forgive me, I'm going to re-state our areas of conflict (some of which I haven't previously stated) in an effort to better organize the discussion.

These are the changes you made that I disagree with:

Changing the categorization scheme so that instead of categorizing most entries by their topic, they are categorized by whether they are acronyms or not. I disagree with this approach because it is entirely possible that someone will look up a "DASH" without knowing whether it is an acronym or not, and I don't see any benefit to separating out the acronyms from the other links. I don't believe acronyms are specifically addressed in any guidance, but MOS:DP#Longer lists does say "The list may be broken up by subject area" (emphasis mine).
Replacing the entry "Several series of GE locomotives" with a list of every single locomotive with "Dash" in the name. The point of my listing the former entry was that a person who was looking for one of the "Dash" locomotives would be able to see that entry, click on the link and find more information about any of the locomotives in any of the Dash series. I would not object to separate links to the Dash-7 series, the Dash-8 series, and the Dash-9 series. I still don't see any reason to list every single one of these locomotives on this disambiguation page when they are all described on the linked list.
The way you have formatted every entry. The MOS may support putting "Dash" at the front of an entry when the actual link is to a page that is not an exact synonym of "dash." For example, MOS:DP#Red links provides the example of "Flibbygibby, a type of noodle." But this page does not have any of that type of entry. Every entry provides a link to an article where the article's title is something that is called "Dash." A sprint (race) is called a dash. Driving Alexandrians Safely Home is called DASH. There is NO need to put "Dash" or "DASH" in front of these entries. See the examples at MOS:DP#Linking to a primary topic, MOS:DP#Synonyms, MOS:DP#URL anchor notation, MOS:DP#Order of entries. MOS:DP#Piping, the link you provided, is the only part of the MOS that even suggests placing "Dash" at the beginning, and I would personally not format that entry the way it is given in the example. However, the example is provided to illustrate piping, not to illustrate how the entry is structured, and none of these links are piped.

Your other changes I'm generally fine with; however, I don't feel they particularly add anything and I don't want to go through and fix all of the above manually just to preserve the few changes that I find unobjectionable, as opposed to just undoing the entire revision. (Except for removing the Street Fighter stuff, which could obviously be done quickly to any version of the page.) Propaniac (talk) 13:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the purposes of hearing from another editor, I'll weigh in. I could go either way on the first point (listing Acronyms under their own heading). If they are listed separately, however, I think the section should begin "DASH may stand for:" and then omit all the DASH's down the line. Which is to say that I agree with Propaniac's third point. I also strongly agree with the second point. Listing all the locomotive models is excessive and unhelpful on this page. I find it only remotely possible that this is what someone is looking for by typing in DASH, and if they are, Propaniac's suggestion to include links to the series lists completely covers it without extending this page beyond reason. SlackerMom (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dashing Cody Rhodes

I think that Dashing Cody Rhodes should be added to this disambiguation page. He's been referred to as his first name as "Dashing." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.45.76.12 (talk) 21:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Dash" Hammett?

Why is "Dash" Hammett listed here, with "Dash" as his given name? His name was Dashiel Hammett, not Dash. I suppose Dash could have been his nickname, but it's not mentioned in his Wikipedia page and a quick googling doesn't mention it. Does anyone even refer to this writer as "Dash" Hammett? 190.195.73.122 (talk) 02:17, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]