Talk:Emily

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles

Thomas

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Thomas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thomas the Tank Engine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ThomasWikipedia:WikiProject Animation/Thomas & Friends task forceTemplate:WikiProject ThomasThomas articles

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

Stereotype?[edit]

Was the name Emily a stereotype in the late 60s/70s? There are 3 songs i know which are about some Emily:

The bear - Not A Rose For Emily, Pink Floyd - See Emily Play, Simon & Garfunkel - For Emily, Whenever I May Find Her The Designers - Emily Shalant is a tasty treat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.167.131.26 (talk) 19:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Greets, bergfalke[reply]

Meaning[edit]

It says "Emily: also meaning industrious." It is also written: "Amelia" is an unrelated germanic name meaning "work" This needs some clarification, that is, if anybody ever visits this page. --Monkeyfoetus 09:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suffragists[edit]

it might be better to put 'Female Political Activists' at the moment it says 'Suffragists' with a Suffragette listed underneath it. they are two very different things and movements, so i thought i'd just mention it. 82.43.141.45 17:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)emily[reply]

Good point. I should have noticed that when I cleaned the page yesterday. Pontificake 17:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Copy to Wiktionary}}[edit]

Just to clarify, I thought it should be transwikied because there is content about the name Emily in this article that is not already in the Wiktionary article. My intention was to remove the alternate spellings, translations, etymology, and popularity sections after the transwiki. Pan Dan 22:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary already had all bar 2 of the translations, and the alternative spellings largely duplicate the translations and are very probably confusions of the two. Wiktionary already covers all of the etymological ground for this proper noun and the two other ones mentioned, and more thoroughly to boot. Uncle G 17:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Concerning "In 2005, Emily was the most popular baby name...": I would have thought that information about a name's popularity, being essentially information about the usage of the name itself, would go on Wiktionary per WP:WINAD? Pan Dan 22:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Usage information is generally more along the lines of how a word is used in sentences, common errors and confusions, fine distinctions amongst words with similar meanings, and so forth. Certainly, statistics for what given names are popular in a certain country is, if verifiable, encyclopaedia article territory and content. The better question is where and how the encyclopaedia should present that information. It seems odd to present that information in pieces scattered across individual articles on each separate name. Uncle G 23:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - As to Emily being the most popular female name in the U.S. in 2005, that information already seems to be in List_of_the_most_popular_names_in_the_2000s_in_the_United_States, which more generally presents the statistics you refer to. So I suppose we can remove that information from Emily, perhaps advising the reader to "See also" List of most popular given names (hopefully just the first step of many in setting Emily on the road to becoming a proper disambiguation page).
      On what names are popular in a certain country being encyclopedia content, it seems User:Black Falcon was right after all in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most popular given names :) But, acknowledging your distinction between usage and popularity, I would still think that statistics about what given names are popular in a given country is essentially information about those specific names, hence dictionary content. (So I would argue, for example, that pages such as List_of_the_most_popular_names_in_the_2000s_in_the_United_States ought to be transwikied to Wiktionary and deleted from Wikipedia.) Pan Dan 18:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think that the "See also" is a good idea. Uncle G 15:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        One for two. Not bad :) Pan Dan 16:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation[edit]

I haven't yet taken the action suggested by my dialogue above with Uncle G, because what I'd really like to do is convert this page to a proper Wikipedia:Disambiguation page, which it purports to be but is not. We should remove, for example, the list of people whose first name is Emily. Any objections? Pan Dan 16:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup of March 31, 2007[edit]

Thanks for removing the list of people named Emily and the non-disambiguation content about Emily from Emily. However I think that the list content should be removed entirely from article space, and as for the info about the popularity of the name Emily, a link to List of most popular given names from Emily will suffice, as discussed at Talk:Emily. So I have proposed for deletion Emily (name) and People named Emily. Just wanted to let you know. Best, Pan Dan 17:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, I forgot to check Talk:Emily. I usually do it before starting to cleanup, but this time it slipped, for whatever reason. Sorry.. One of my self-guidelines on dab cleanup is not do delete unique content, but to park it on new articles and let others decide on the merit of the new standalone articles; if I knew about List of most popular given names, I would not have created Emily (name) because I could have deleted that content; however, I'm neutral on People named Emily because I don't know if any of those people are known simply as Emily (sometimes I write exactly that on list intros).

(This thread was copied from User_talk:Mafmafmaf#Emily). Please reply HERE, not there.)--maf 18:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]