Talk:Drift
 | Disambiguation | |||
| ||||
Split[edit]
why not split it? I searched for 'drift', wanting the geological term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.41.167 (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2005
Drifting vs. "Drifting" (motorsport)[edit]
Some disambiguation is necessary between drifting as a synonym for oversteer and drifting as a sport unto itself. The definition currently on this page describes the former, and the page to which it links describes the latter. It's an important distinction as drifting (the technique) is seen in nearly all motorsports, not just drifting (the motorsport).
Is this the correct place to make this distinction? One link would direct to oversteer while the other would link to drifting (motorsport). AKADriver 19:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Drifting is not always oversteering. A car can be drifting on four wheels and not oversteering at all, or indeed be understeering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koopra (talk • contribs) 21:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Daventry International Railfreight Terminal (DIRFT), in England[edit]
Why is this in the article? DRIFT is not DIRFT. In the See Also section.TWAMWIR (talk) 19:02, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Entry for the film Drifts[edit]
I explained when I reverted User:Ulissipus the first time that entries in disambiguation pages should only have one link to another page, and that the link to upcoming films is irrelevant because that page doesn't even mention Drifts. Also "upcoming" is not a standard English word in the formal register expected of an encyclopedia article, and, given that User:Tertulius has assured us that shooting is complete for this film, "unreleased" is more accurate as it implies that the film is complete and ready for release, whereas "upcoming" could mean that the film is only in the planning stage. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
- «Not a standard English word in the formal register expected of an encyclopedia article»? How can you say that if Upcoming films are listed in Wikipedia? If Drifts is not listed, it should or could be.
- To avoid confusion, the definition has been changed : « There are numerous films set to be released in 2014. While some films have announced release dates but have yet to begin filming, others are in production or have finished it but do not yet have definite release dates.»
- User:Ulissipus (talk) 20:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
- I agree that "upcoming" is an English word, but it strikes be as rather too informal for an encyclopedia. I would expect to see it used in tabloids and fan magazines, but not in a serious newspaper or an academic work, which is the standard of language that an encyclopedia should use. We don't have an article called Upcoming films, but that redirects to 2014 in film. That, however, is a minor point. The main point is that "unreleased" is more precise than "upcoming", and I'm rather surprised that you are edit-warring over this, as it is an editor with both a remarkably similar writing style and a remarkably similar insistence on promoting this film to you who has told us that shooting of this film is complete. "Unreleased" descibes this situation better for your purposes than "upcoming", which is an ill-defined word that could mean that this is just an idea in a director's head. The other point is that entries in disambiguation pages should only have one link per MOS:DABENTRY, and that link should obviously not be to an article that doesn't even mention the film in question. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
- UFF!
- User talk:Ulissipus 20:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.37.62.178 (talk)
- I have no idea what "UFF" is supposed to mean, but hope that it's not the second meaning listed at the Urban Dictionary. Not that any of the other meanings are much better. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:05, 21 July 2013 (UTC)