Talk:Q100

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

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Edit

that edit was not vandalism... it was a computer error on my end. apologies.

PROD

If this is deleted, it should be replaced by a dab page. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 04:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the PROD template: as suggested above I have restored the earlier dab format, adding in an extra entry for the meaning that corresponds to the most recent supposed meaning. I have also remove the Stats project template from this talk page, the article is now only a disambig. Melcombe (talk) 08:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm baffled by this "supposed meaning" stuff William M. Connolley (talk) 14:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Short?

As far as I can tell, the hydrology article doesn't cover Q100, and indeed Q100 isn't just hydrology. So I don't understand [1] William M. Connolley (talk) 11:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:MOSDAB for disambiguation pages. The essential thing is that entries are short and the page is not as full article (and, strictly, entries should follow rules that aren't being followed here). Everything that can or needs to be saids about Q100 in hydrology is already in the article 100-year flood and doesn't need to be repeated here. If there is another meaning not covered in that article, then start a new article and place a link on this diambiguation page, don't try to turn it into an article or lose the other meanings that others have thought important enough to include. Melcombe (talk) 09:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Sorry, I'd missed the 100y link, which I agree explains things William M. Connolley (talk) 10:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]