Contents

Talk:Faux

Disambiguation

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Faux entries

Bkonrad I think that the entries you deleted are relevant because their title is "Faux".--Cassius Fury (talk) 14:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The removed entries failed WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRL. You version also had many, many extra links completely irrelevant for disambiguation. older ≠ wiser 15:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bkonrad can you address specifically each of the items that fail WP:DABMENTION and how do they? Because I don't see it. If an entry has an article in another language's wiki, the sensible choice is to keep the entry. I shall notice that there are no rules set for this article, so why removing red links/entries without link? Also, can you explain why you removed "... a teacher of Ernest Maes" from Jean-Baptiste Faulx's entry but kept "... triathlete who was 10th at the 2013 Ironman World Championship" in Catherine Faux's entry? Thanks--Cassius Fury (talk) 16:05, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you reviewed the relevant guidelines at WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRL? If there is no English language content, my take is there is nothing to mention for disambiguation. Content guidelines in other language Wikipedias with respect to referencing and notablity may not be same as in English wiki. In that respect, there is little difference between an inter-language link and an external link — just because content exists about a subject somewhere does not necessarily mean disambiguation is needed in English. If these other language topics are notable in English, suggestion is to create the article for them.

As for Ernest Maes vs ironman -- I suppose the latter description could also be trimmed -- but that was not anything new in the edits you had made so I hadn't considered it. older ≠ wiser 16:21, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bkonrad as for Maes vs. ironman I agree with deleting both (or keeping both). I shall notice that you removed for the third time Faux (river) from the list, can you explain why? I again kindly ask you to address each entry, because I don't see where they fail WP:DABMENTION and WP:DABRL.

Have you any knowledge of French language and history? The difference between Faux and Faulx is the same between "speare" ans "spear" in English. They have same origin, meaning and pronunciation, same word, simply one of them was modernized, the other not. Thus the entries you removed do not belong to another DAB, which is why the French version has the both Faulx and Faux in the same article. Creating another article for "Faulx" would be absurd.--Cassius Fury (talk) 16:40, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the river entry. Separate dab might be absurd in French, but not so much in English. older ≠ wiser 16:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bkonrad I think maybe you deleted the river Faux because you didn't think it through or examined the matter carefully. I saw the page you created (Faulx (disambiguation)). If you didn't know about the etimologies, it's fine, we all make mistakes. But I gotta tell you that the page you created is useless because the words are one and the same: one is descended from the other: one is "colour" and the other "color". At most, this fact should be mentioned in the lead.--Cassius Fury (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I had deleted entry for the review because you only very recently created the article for it. When I had first checked it did not exist. older ≠ wiser 17:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You removed it three times. Anyway, please, address the other points. The chief of which being that making a list for "faulx" is stupid, because the two words are the same. "Faulx" will hardly have a separate entry in a French dictionary.--Cassius Fury (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You restored badly edited additions multiple times and removed other valid edits. While you might see these are the same, I don't. The word faux has essentially been anglicized -- although as an adjective there is nothing to write about it as a subject. Faulx remains as a distinctly French unnaturalized variant. older ≠ wiser 17:32, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits restricted to admins until you two can find some neutral ground or do a Request for Comment. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:29, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]