Here on Davis Wiki we like to keep page name styles uniform. If you're unsure how to name a page, first check the Wiki Style Guide. If it's not in the style guide, the community has probably not yet reached a consensus. That's where this page comes in.
Comments:
Note: You must be logged in to add comments
Should pages such as Internal Affairs Commission be renamed to "ASUCD Internal Affairs Commission?" Once consensus on this matter is reached, this should likely be integrated into the Wiki Style Guide.
I don't know of any other internal affairs commissions. The City of Davis does not have one. I don't think the Davis Police Department does either, as I can't find any commissions on their website. Quit going overboard with making things less centered on the university — life in Davis really is centered on the University. —BrentLaabs
Your life may be centered around the University, but you do not represent the entire population of Davis. Of the nearly 10 years I've lived in Davis, UCD has been a part of my daily life for a sum total of 8 months. —GrahamFreeman
I think its important to be specific and uniform, just as the office of external affairs is the asucd office of external affairs. To keep the name accuarte and uniform with everything else in asucd, "asucd" should be added. Also life in davis is not centered around university life. 18 years of my life in Davis were not centered around university life.-JimSchwab
I guess my real complaint is that since there is no other Internal Affairs Commission in Davis, I really don't want to have to type ASUCD every time I link to the page. The page says ASUCD in the first line, so I don't think any confusion would result. I don't think we need to label Linguistics as UC Davis Department of Linguistics and Mrak Hall as Mrak Hall at UC Davis. This is a wiki for locals, and unless there's reason to have a disambiguation page, I don't see that it helps anything. Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. —BrentLaabs
When I saw the page listed in an index, I thought "Davis PD has an internal affairs commission? Wow, cool." And then I found that it's yet another ASUCD page that applies to a tiny subset of the UC Davis population and a very, very tiny subset of the Davis population. If you see "Mrak Hall" in an index on the Davis Wiki, you're not going to think "Wow, Davis PD has a Mrak Hall?" "Linguistics" should be "Department of Linguistics" or "Linguistics Department", since there are undoubtedly linguists (professional and amateur) in Davis who have no UCDavis affiliation. —GrahamFreeman
The way I see it is (1) The only person here confused is you. The first line of each of these pages mentions ASUCD. (2) An excessive number of links would need to be fixed when this changed. (3) There are only one of these commissions in all of Davis. Sure, there are two different Senates, but this was actually fixed. But there's no reason to have excessively long names on every page if there's only one of them. —BrentLaabs
2006-02-09 23:59:00 1) I just happen to be the most outspoken person on this topic. 2) I had many of those links corrected, and was working to correct the rest, when you started reverting without proper prior discussion. 3) There is no harm in making a page's association clear in the title, especially when doing so adds six characters (including the space). There may in the future be a similarly-named "Business & Finance Commission" in Davis, whether in City government, at Sac City or at CSUS (of interest to their Davis students), etc. —GrahamFreeman
2006-02-07 02:43:15 I'm with Brent, especially in this rather obvious case. But even in general, the titles of UCD-related pages don't need to reflect that, as long as it's obvious from the page content that the item in question is UCD-related. Is it really that disappointing to think momentarily that something isn't UCD-related and then find out it is? And if you know of some group in Davis who gets together to do linguistics, by all means have at it. —RoyWright
2006-02-09 23:59:00 Roy, it's not disappointing - it's just an unnecessary waste of time. —GrahamFreeman
2006-02-07 12:19:22 Okay, now Brent's being silly with the B&F thing. —RoyWright
2006-02-07 12:26:04 I believe all ASUCD commissions should have ASUCD in their title, but separating them is unneccesary. For the wiki to expand beyond the campus, I believe titles of pages should be specific. I cannot see anything negative by adding "ASUCD" to the title of a few pages for clarity's sake. —JamesSchwab
2006-02-07 13:03:11 Similar to James, I think it's the proper title and gives information to name the main entry "ASUCD Foo Club". I don't see any confusion, though, and thus think it's a bit nitpicky (but we all have our own sacred nits). I wouldn't revert a change to add ASUCD to the title, especially if there's a redirect. It's similar to renaming businesses their proper name and having a redirect by their common name, like Abe's or U Mall. —JabberWokky
2006-02-07 18:53:36 This isn't really germaine, but I will say that until I actually looked at the page, I assumed that Minors referred to people under 21. But this sort of generic ambiguity is pretty much impossible to avoid. —DanielBrown
2006-02-09 23:59:00 daniel, I had the same first impression of the "Minors" page. I agree that it's impossible to completely avoid ambiguity, but I don't think reasonable efforts to dispel ambiguity should be discouraged. (Just to be clear, I'm not accusing you, daniel, of doing so.) —GrahamFreeman
2006-02-12 18:42:00 No, I agree—there's no real reason why one needs to give up at all. It's more a problem that's guaranteed to recur than anything else. And certainly, there are UCD undergrad-centric aspects to this wiki that have been intensely confusing to me as a short-term Davis resident. I agree with the suggestion below of making something like "UCD Academic Minors" page. Oh, and there's no reason why you'd know it, but I'm usually a dan, not a daniel. (My name is common enough that there was already a DanBrown.) —DanielBrown
2006-02-10 20:13:21 Should "Minors" be "Academic Minors" or UC Davis Academic Minors"? Maybe "Minors" should be a disambiguation page pointing to "Academic Minors" and "Minors (under 18)"? —JasonAller
2006-02-11 12:00:19 Good idea! I'd go with "Academic Minors" + the disambiguation page. —GrahamFreeman
2006-02-12 16:32:30 Oh come on, despite the lack of another "internal affairs commission" we have to add ASUCD to it, but something completely ambiguous like "the anonymous crowd" doesn't get naming clarification? —DavisWikiGnome
Why did you rename "The Anonymous Crowd" if you feel that way? Don't be destructive to make a point. —PhilipNeustrom
No seriously, I was genuinely confused about the Anonymous Crowd. I'm not trying to make a point, and I don't think it was destructive. I'm not using The Anonymous Crowd as an example for the Internal Affairs debate, I'm using the Internal Affairs debate as guidance for The Anonymous Crowd. —DavisWikiGnome
It doesn't seem that way from what you said, namely, "we have to add ASUCD to it." Personally, I don't see anything ambiguous with "The Anonymous Crowd," aside from the fact the group has the word "anonymous" in their band name, so it seemed to me that you were being silly and trying to make a point. —PhilipNeustrom
2006-02-21 01:00:26 What's the consensus on using periods in names with initals? We have the Peter J. Shields pages with periods, and the JB Anderson pages without. —ArlenAbraham
