Talk:PIA

PIA is a Private Investigation Administrator

PIA means Private Investigation Administrator.

PIA is equal to detective in korea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Managermaker (talk • contribs) 00:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added your suggestion into the list. --Trafford09 (talk) 12:50, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Order of entries

It's not about which article is popular - it's about listing it in alphabetical order.119.155.43.30 (talk) 10:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. Thanks for starting discussion about this. I hope many other editors will also participate in the discussion here.

I promoted Pakistan International Airlines to be the Main Topic on the disambiguation page, as per Wikipedia's guidelines in wp:DAB, which I suppose we all should read, & to which we should all try to adhere.

Now, it really doesn't matter to me which PIA should be the main topic. [Would you or anybody else care to nominate a different PIA as main topic?]

Frequently, wp:DAB pages exist with no main topic. However, another editor seems to think that PIA should have a main topic, whereas others feel there should be no main topic (I think). It seems that an example to follow might be this one, for 'school'.

I've thought about this. To me, it doesn't matter at all whether there's a main topic, nor indeed which one we should choose.

I am impartial - I have no connection or wp:COI with Pakistan, Pakistan International Airlines, any other PIA listed, nor indeed any airline.

The Pakistan International Airlines article has no "popularity" to me - I don't recall ever editing it.

But, on careful reflection, I have to admit that Pakistan International Airlines is the only PIA I've come across, from the long list. And - as I say IMHO - Pakistan International Airlines seems without doubt to be the best-known of all the PIAs listed.

However, it's not my opinion that counts more than anybody else's (although I urge Anon. IP users to enjoy the many benefits of easily and quickly registering a named account).

What matters is that we follow guidelines, and reach wp:consensus as to which entry to list as the main topic - if indeed any.

Let's hope many more editors use this section, to give their opinion.

Thanks & regards, --Trafford09 (talk) 12:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with the point you're making, yet this doesnt seeem to be the case in every disambiguation page, none seem to place a particular name or acronym as more relevant to others, I respect you for sticking to rules but maybe you should just let go of this, as no editor is keen on discussing it either, I put in another project discussion and it only got one reply no consensus demands either.119.155.44.70 (talk) 12:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK - Personally, I'm relaxed about it. I'll leave your version intact.

However, I took the stance I did due to certain edit-warring that I had witnessed on this disambiguation page.

Maybe those participants will leave well alone - let's hope.

It might still be helpful to encourage more editors to enter their thoughts here, as the airline has 5.5 million yearly passengers, which seems to give it some prominence. Trafford09 (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manual Of Style - excerpt

Wikipedia has a set of guidelines, mentioned above, called its Manual Of Style, or MOS. There are specific elements of MOS dedicated to many things. Such as:

Disambiguation Pages

Guidelines for Disambiguation Pages (DAB) can be read at wp:DAB.

These include:

Each entry should have exactly one navigable (blue) link to efficiently guide readers to the most relevant article for that use of the ambiguous term. Do not wikilink any other words in the line. For example:

"Dark Star" (song), a song by the Grateful Dead

or

"Dark Star" (song), by the Grateful Dead

but not

~~"Dark Star" (song), a song by the psychedelic rock band The Grateful Dead~~

Hence, we should change the PIA page, to have only one blue link per line. --Trafford09 (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]