Talk:AP

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

somebody needs to sort all these in alphabetical order—Preceding unsigned comment added by Unixer (talk • contribs) 08:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Associated Press[edit]

Shouldn't the associated press article link here? With all due respect, Anthony's Productions isn't one-tenth of one percent as well known by the "AP" acronym as Associated Press. "AP" is practically synonomous with Associated Press. I don't know how to make it so it links here, but this is some sort of bad joke. If someone can change it, please do. President David Palmer 03:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons why this is no longer a disambiguation page[edit]

This was originally a disambiguation page with many links. It was flagged for clean-up and after some consideration I eventually decided to make this drastic change. I have explained my rationale below. Certainly if anyone disagrees with these changes, feel free to drop me a line on my user talk page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Marchije (talk • contribs) 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About disambiguation pages[edit]

There are many words and acronyms in the English language that are used to describe more than one thing; for example "Go" could refer to the actual verb, the Chinese board game, the unrelated family board game, the 2001 Japanese film, the American gameshow, the 1970s supergroup, the song by Moby, etc., so when someone uses "go" as their search word in Wikipedia, there needs to be a way to direct them to the article on the particular "go" they are actually looking for.

Therefore, a disambiguation page titled AP should not be a list every person, place or thing with the initials "AP"; it should assist a Wikipedia user in finding an existing article whose topic is (or is often referred to with) just the word "ap" or the letters "AP".

Before adding a topic to a disambiguation page, one should be asking oneself:

  • If you were looking for this topic on Wikipedia, would you simply and only type "ap" or "AP" as your search word?
  • Are there people who might refer to your topic by only using the word/letters "ap" or "AP"?

Please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) for more info.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Marchije (talk • contribs) 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My edits[edit]

After going through the articles posted to this page, the only 2 articles which I felt warranted being on a dab page for "ap" or "AP" were Ap (water) and Associated Press.

Some might question why Associated Press deserves a spot on a dab page any more than say, Allied Press or Area postrema; I would point out a couple of things:

  • Many of the article links that I removed from this page did not even mention a reference to "AP" in the body of their respective articles; this adds further credence to the fact that the topic is not commonly referred to as "ap" or "AP"
  • At the time of my edits there were 52 wiki pages linked to AP (not including redirects or Wikipedia project pages.) Of those 52 pages, 14 of them meant to link to the actual dab page, and 31 were actually references to the Associated Press. The remaining 7 pages referred to topics which did not even have a link on the AP dab page.
  • I also moved some of the other links to List of acronyms and initialisms since they are better suited there

Given this only left links to Ap (water) and Associated Press I decided to redirect AP to the Associated Press and Ap to Ap (water) then added soft redirects to one another's pages.

If in the future someone has created an article on AP, A.P., A-P or other variations thereof, then a new dab page should be created at that time. If anyone requires assistance with this, I would be more than happy to help. Marchije (talk) 02:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restoral of AP disambiguation page on May 28, 2008[edit]

I came to this page when I was trying to find out what airline uses the code AP (Air One) and there are more entries that I think should be kept (Anno Persico for example), so I put the disamb back. I do agree with you that a lot of them could be deleted. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As per my response on User talk:Pax:Vobiscum:
Hello again. Thanks for responding. I do however disagree with entries such as IATA codes on disambiguation pages - in my opinion this goes against MOS:DAB. However, in the spirit of collaboration and consensus, I have posted the following topic on WT:MOSDAB to see what others think. Feel free to weigh-in on the discussion yourself.
Thanks again, Marchije (talk) 04:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

Currently this and AP (disambiguation) are nearly copies of each other. We really only need one disambiguation page. swaq 17:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. Go ahead! I added the necessary toplink to Associated Press already, so that AP can redirect there again. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 01:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

I cleaned up the page according to WP:MOSDAB, note that there's certainly more ways to categorise such a large list. Widefox (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ap (water)[edit]

This entry for ap (water) was in the Linguistics section. I took it out of there, but my edits were undone several times so I guess some justification is in order. The target article: Ap (water) might seems like it's about the Sanskrit word ap, because there's a lengthy intro about the etymology and there's a bit of trivia at the end about the word borrowed into Thai, and more importantly the article doesn't have a proper lead. However, if that was what the article was about, then it would have no place on wikipedia but would instead be on wiktionary. It's here on wikipedia because of its middle section, which is about the concept in the Rigveda and later Hindu mythology. This is what the article is about. If there's any doubt, it's worth looking at Talk:Ap_(water) – the three WikiProjects that it is part of are: Religion/Interfaith, India and Hinduism/Mythology.

Therefore I'm moving the entry out of the Linguistics section and into Mythology. Uanfala (talk) 14:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not about mythology at all and incorrectly categorized as such. The article is almost entirely about the word and related derivations and etymology there is some mention of associations with some vedic gods, but the term itself is not mythological. older ≠ wiser 15:07, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think two separate WikiProjects (Religions and Mythology) have both incorrectly categorised is as such? The article is not almost entirely about the word: it consists of altogether four paragraphs, two of them are about the word (one of these two is a very short one) and the other two are about the concept of the waters in Vedic mythology and later Hinduism. If you still think otherwise, you have to demonstrate your point. And if you don't think "mythology" is a good label, you're welcome to suggest a different one. Uanfala (talk) 16:36, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, none of the paragraphs are about the term "ap" as a mythological construct. One paragraphs discusses some associations the gods Indra and Agni had with water, and the last paragraph discusses some later associations of water with Puranic gods and Hindu philosphy. older ≠ wiser 18:46, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see how this doesn't fall within the scope of mythology. What different heading would you suggest? Uanfala (talk) 18:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was just fine under linguistics, as most of the content is about the word as a word. If that doesn't suit you, I'd just as soon leave it under other uses. older ≠ wiser 19:05, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 February 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 11:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


AP → AP (disambiguation) – In the same manner that UPI redirects to United Press International where a hatnote advises that "UPI" redirects here. For other uses, see UPI (disambiguation)., so should AP redirect to Associated Press where a hatnote would advise that "AP" redirects here. For other uses, see AP (disambiguation). This matter had been commented upon 13 years ago at Talk:AP#Associated Press above and 12 years ago at Talk:AP#My edits above, but did not progress any further. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 10:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. "AP" is just too generic and too common to be a primary redirect in this way. Most two-letter abbreviations are. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Delving into this matter's history, it may be noted that the AP (disambiguation) page was created 17 years ago (on 29 January 2003) as a redirect to Associated Press and was subsequently converted into a no-primary-topic dab page. Two years later (on 18 April 2005), a competing dab page was created, also aimed as a redirect to Associated Press and was likewise converted into a no-primary dab. The two competing dab pages co-existed for 3 years and 3 months, with occasional competing redirects to Associated Press, until the older dab page, AP (disambiguation), was merged into the younger one, AP, on 31 July 2008. There has not, however, been a single discussion as to whether the AP acronym used by Associated Press is, in fact, the primary topic for the AP disambiguation page. If there may be, among future users of Wikipedia, any who might wonder, such as the past user (on 19 January 2007, above) who thought that "this is some sort of bad joke", whether the topic was ever raised, this discussion will at least leave a historical record. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:17, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose AP rounds anyone? There are so many potential significant definitions for this abbreviation that there is no primary topic and never will be.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC considering the sheer size of what falls under the initials.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 15 August 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved consensus is clear and nominator has withdrawn.(non-admin closure) Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:30, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


AP → AP (disambiguation) – so that AP can redirect to Advanced Placement, because i don't think that most people abbreviate associated press to ap (as opposed to a well known acronym like ge for general electric) and when you type "ap" into google search (look at image to the right) then search predictions will only show stuff related to advanced placement, and not one thing related to associated press. Thesun227 (talk) 15:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • support as nom Thesun227 (talk) 15:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think this is a good faith nomination, but barring some evidence that it would be the primary topic I can't support. People most certainly do refer to the Associated Press as the AP (it's their logo!), and if anything seems more commonly used.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • comment - (it's their logo!) so what? because AP is also advanced placement's logo! Thesun227 (talk) 00:32, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • You seem to be confused -- you're making a nomination that the Advanced Placement test is the primary topic, not that the Associated Press isn't. We aren't arguing that the news agency should be the primary, so arguments showing both have good claims to it would point to opposing the nomination, not supporting it.--Yaksar (let's chat) 15:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – the Associated Press is still also very strongly associated with this abbreviation. (Google searches aren't a complete picture, often.) It's a common enough abbreviation that Advanced Placement isn't the 100% clear primary topic. Paintspot Infez (talk) 19:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I get Associated Press when I Google AP. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:51, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, "(do NOT press enter)" says it all really :p Nohomersryan (talk) 20:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose when googled AP it means Associated Press so i suggest to move acronym AP, which is a DAB page to redirected Associated press and placed the current page as AP (disambiguation) as Associated Press clearly WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for all AP acronym articles. 180.245.101.217 (talk) 23:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • comment - look at massviews. the article with most views is actually Andhra Pradesh! also, googling AP actually says "see results about advanced placement" beneath the associated press knowledge panel, and the first page mixes results about Advanced Placement with results about Associated Press! the AP dab itself also doesn't list Associated Press at the top (as opposed to how HP lists HP inc at the top), and there was a requested move less than half a year ago about making Associated Press the primary topic which reached consensus NOT to move it. Thesun227 (talk) 00:45, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • And most of the comments there were around there being too many other uses rather than another being primary, see WP:RPURPOSE "But often an abbreviation will have multiple meanings, none of which is a primary topic—in that case a disambiguation page should be created rather than a redirect.". Although Andhra Pradesh gets the most views it appears that the abbreviation more commonly refers to Associated Press judging by the Google results and in any case Andhra Pradesh doesn't get more views than the other combined anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:56, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all of the points above, and the nom's own massviews evidence, which shows Advanced Placement is significantly behind Associated Press in views. Also, the previous discussion was not well attended, so hopefully this discussion might establish a stronger consensus to leave this page where it is. kennethaw88 • talk 04:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose AP means Associated Press per massviews so if this was moved to AP (disambiguation), Associated Press should be place on top of the page rather than Advanced Placement because Associated Press is WP: PRIMARYTOPIC for all other articles abbreviated as AP. then in Associated Press article, on the hatnote then places like this:
"AP" redirects here. For other uses, see AP (disambiguation).
182.1.233.228 (talk) 05:43, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Advanced Placement is not Primary Topic, but it is Associated Press that needs to be deserved as top on DAB page. So if you want to moved this page into AP (Disambiguation), the former title needs to be redirected to Associated Press page. 182.1.228.181 (talk) 10:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • comment - stop asking to make associated press the primary topic. read my other points first. and see the closed requested move above this one. Thesun227 (talk) 13:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - can we just close this requested move now as not moved per WP:SNOW? there isn't much more to add to this anymore. 35.141.137.229 (talk) 14:04, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • go ahead! we have reached a conclusion already: advanced placement is not the primary topic, and associated press isn't either, because the consensus of the requested move in February was to not move it. Thesun227 (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. 36.69.60.78 (talk) 14:49, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

anatomy and physiology?[edit]

anatomy and physiology? Huzaifa abedeen (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation terminology[edit]

Before I made a few edits, the article listed "A&P mechanic" under "Military engineering." This is the wrong place, because civilian aircraft mechanics with airframe and powerplant ratings are also called A&P mechanics. "Autopilot" was listed under "Other uses."

I made a few edits to create a new "Aviation" section listing "A&P mechanic" and "Autopilot", removing those from their original places.

@Ohnoitsjamie then rolled back my edits and posted on my talk page claiming that my edits here and on another page were "disruptive." When I pointed out that "Autopilot" was already listed and I just moved it, they edited the page again to remove the original listing.

I believe that "autopilot" should be listed, and should be included in an "Aviation" section with "A&P mechanic," but at the very least, "A&P mechanic" needs to be moved out of "military engineering" as it is not just a military term. I would do this, but I don't want an edit war. Does anyone else have thoughts on this? 206.204.236.108 (talk) 15:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Anomalous propagation" does not belong under "military engineering" either, but I don't feel comfortable editing this page now. 206.204.236.108 (talk) 15:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source to support that "AP" is a common acronym for autopilot? I don't see "AP" mentioned anywhere in the Autopilot article. "AP" for "Anomalous propagation" is supported by this reference in that article. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:31, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here are a few:
https://sassofia.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Aviation-Abbreviations.pdf (it lists "auto pilot")
https://www.flightdeckfriend.com/become-a-pilot/pilot-and-aviation-abbreviations/ (also "auto pilot")
https://www.flypgs.com/en/travel-glossary/abbreviations ("autopilot")
https://www.gofir.com/aviation_abbreviations.htm ("autopilot") 206.204.236.108 (talk) 15:47, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if exhaustive glossaries demonstrate that AP is a common acronym. Those list things like "APRT" for airport and "TRNG" for training. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:04, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is generally considered to show that an acronym is common? Would it need to be articles from WP:RSes saying something like "An autopilot (AP) is a device that automatically controls an aircraft. When the AP is engaged..."? 206.204.236.108 (talk) 23:58, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would be a stronger source. Ideally any articles listed on an abbreviation disambig page should have a sourced reference to the abbreviation in the article itself. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:02, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, if that is the criterion, then it is probably best to leave it out. Where should A&P mechanic and anomalous propagation go, since they aren't military-specific? 206.204.236.108 (talk) 21:10, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:AP&oldid=1197153454"