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
Requested move
There is no primary topic at Ultimo, so the disambiguation page should be at that title. PamD (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Ultimo, New South Wales was at this name until recently, but agree there's no primary topic. It means a lot of links need fixing, unfortunately. Andrewa (talk) 02:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Have just dabbed all the links - mostly from various models to the lingerie company, but several to the NSW location too. PamD (talk) 09:24, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The move has now been made on the basis that this was a misplaced disambiguation page. PamD (talk) 00:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually if you look at the hitcount the lingerie company is out in front by some distance, and you'd save a lot of extra clicks by putting the lingerie article here with an {{
Ultimo (lingerie) - as well as being less verbose, the "designer" bit could be considered POV - but having seen the "competition" I think it should come here. FlagSteward (talk) 10:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for the "heads-up". I'm not convinced, and would contest any proposal to move this disambiguation page, as there are too many diverse meanings for "ultimo". PamD (talk) 12:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
... and I've moved it to the shorter title and cleaned up the incoming links to the dab page again - by no means all were to the lingerie, several to the place. PamD (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There may be many possible meanings, but
otheruses4
}} is intended for. Now I know it may be uncomfortable to recognise the primacy of a knicker company over other uses of a word with a distinguished pedigree, but that's pop culture for you (and a tribute to the strategic use of celebrity totty <g>). But I'm not going to go to war over this, maybe we can revisit it in a few months time when we have more data.
That said - I think pageviews are an important tool for deciding how to organise dabs. It's an example of how Wikipedia can use the fact that it's
WP:NOTPAPER to do things differently and better than conventional encyclopaedias, rather than relying on a voice from on high deciding what's important. FlagSteward (talk) 11:11, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply
