Jump to content

Talk:Apple

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 6 days ago by Chiswick Chap in topic Apple Search Results.
Good articleApple has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 31, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
January 31, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 2, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
March 27, 2008Good article reassessmentListed
August 22, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 18, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 2, 2011Good article reassessmentKept
September 4, 2013Good article reassessmentKept
August 5, 2024Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

Apple Search Results.

[edit]

I believe that searching for "Apple" should lead to a disambiguation page showing both Apple Inc. and the apple fruit.

Both are common topics, and I don't believe either should automatically take priority over the other. Although Apple Inc. is an extremely large and influential company, the fruit is also a common subject in everyday conversation.


I think a disambiguation page would allow users to choose which meaning they intended, rather than assuming that they are searching for the company.


I understand that this topic may have been discussed before, so I would appreciate consideration of whether this approach would be appropriate for Wikipedia's search results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThejimsterF (talk • contribs) 12:18, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

There is certainly merit in the suggestion but it has been rejected five times, most recently nine months ago. There is a list of discussions above. Certes (talk) 12:50, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
Indeed, we definitely do not want to go there a sixth time; volunteers give their time freely and there are many more productive things they can be doing than repeating old arguments again and again. Please let's just go with the (very) well-established consensus. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply
I've added a small FAQ above to summarize the oft-repeated arguments. If I've missed anything important, feel free to extend the FAQ (or drop me a note). Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:03, 27 October 2026 (UTC)Reply