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
@Clarityfiend: Perhaps I should have spelled out all the violations of MOS:DAB that I was cleaning up, but I didn’t remove entries for no reason. The Sistema Nacional de Información Territorial is not talked about on the linked page; there is only an external link to it. The other changes I made were entirely in line with the style guide. Please, if you have questions about my edits, ask me! Don’t just revert. I have several more entries to add myself, and I’ll be reordering them again. Maybe I should put {{in use}} on the page. — Gorthian (talk) 01:55, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Per MOS:DABMENTION, an entry only has to be mentioned. While I've seen this standard questionably applied (e.g. an otherwise unnotable wife), in this case it definitely has the potential for an article. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I felt the same way, actually, so I reworded it to fit. But it isn’t a red link; per MOS:DABRL, A link to a non-existent article (a "red link") should only be included on a disambiguation page when a linked article (not just other disambiguation pages) also includes that red link.
I can only find the French transportation agency SNIT mentioned in two articles, but neither are helpful to someone looking for that particular agency. That’s the only entry I removed from the original page; all the rest are still there, just rearranged. — Gorthian (talk) 02:56, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get why you're opposed to including Sistema Nacional de Información Territorial. This is a government body in two countries and certainly more notable than Branwell F. Snit. As for your citation of a redlink being required in the linked article, that's easily fixed. In fact, I think many of the bodies have articles here already, so external links aren't necessary. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:27, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I inadvertently left that entry out – I did mean to include it without a red link. But I see you’ve edited GeoSUR to get rid of all those external links. Nice job! I was going to do that eventually myself, but non-wiki life has been swamping me. Anyway, I’ve added the red link to this page now. — Gorthian (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
