User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-24894325-20160620203004/@comment-24894325-20160702084811

Ah, we seem to be talking at cross purposes, constantly misunderstanding each other. Probably because, being understandably less versed in the Wiki-lingo, I'm using ordinary English that conflicts with the Wiki terminology. Or maybe because I've significantly changed my position without clearly stating it. (I'm still happy to read your extended thoughts on the matter, though, because that's how I learn.)

So let me explain what I meant in the previous post:

1. I agreed that Dutch is reserved for the robot.
2. Consequently there cannot be a hard redirect from Dutch to anywhere.
3. To replicate the linking of the word "German" to Germany and the word "English" to England with respect to the word "Dutch", link that several editors tried to create before me, one cannot use a redirect because the redirect is not possible (see above).
4. Thus, I proposed to use the pipeline trick writing "Netherlands|Dutch".
5. Unlike creating a redirect that, indeed, can be based on just one moment in time, for this pipeline trick to be correct, one has to check every time it is used that this here use of "Dutch" can be attributed to the Netherlands. That the Fifth Doctor used Dutch for one object/person in one story need not imply that such a word usage can be automatically applied to another object/person from another story set in another time. Let me try to give an example: assuming there is in-universe confirmation, "Roman" in "Roman Holiday" should be pipeline-tricked to Rome, whereas "Roman" in "Roman emperor" should rightfully be pipeline-tricked to Roman Empire. (I think this fickleness of adjectives serves as an additional argument against having pages/redirects for them.)
6. The post by AeD was important for me because it clearly said that it is never incorrect to apply the Fifth Doctor linking of Dutch to the Netherlands (unless in-universe evidence to the contrary occurs some day). Operationally, for me, it means that if I were, say, to create pages for "Dutch Airport Tannoy Announcer" or "The Dutchman" from the audio story Peshka, I don't need to find Peshka-evidence of whether this "Dutch" relates to Holland or the Netherlands or just Amsterdam, I can simply pipeline-trick Dutch to the Netherlands based on the in-universe evidence of the Fifth Doctor from another story.
7. The phenomenon of Roman potentially meaning different things in different stories is something I started thinking of as negative real-world bleed. Positive real-world bleed makes you state facts that are true of the real world. That is against the policy and should not be done. Negative real-world bleed prevents you from unduly extrapolating DWU evidence to state facts that are false in the real world. Here is a simple example of how I use negative real-world bleed. Edward V of England is said to be 12-year-old in 1483 in the The Battle of the Tower. Can I then say that he was born in 1471 and, say, put it on the 1471 web page? But in real world he was born in 1470 (in November). Thus, the negative real-world bleed instructs me not to mention 1471 and stick to stating he was 12 years old in 1483. On the other hand, Mary Shelley said in The Silver Turk she would have been 76 years old in 1873. Since she was born in 1797 in the real world, it is reasonable to extrapolate her year of birth.