Talk:Solo

This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Disambiguation 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

I notice that in consecutive edits, Cdc has removed the mention of Schweppes Solo (an Australian soft drink) [1] and Profoss has added Solo (a Norwegian soft drink) [2]. This leads me to ask two questions:

1. Why did Cdc remove the ozzie drink from the list? [And why was it summarised as "minor editing"? It seems pretty major to me; maybe the removal was accidental...]
2. Are the "Norwegian" and "Australian" soft drinks actually the same lemon-flavoured concoction, sold by Schweppes (or a subsidiary) in both countries? [And why did the inserters of both items feel that they should mention a location?]

In other words, should there be 1, 2, or no soft drinks in the list? I'm inclined to restore the original (before Cdc's edit), but remove the geographic reference on the assumption that it's marketted in various different places. But I'll wait and see if anyone can clarify first. - IMSoP 19:01, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I'm disambiguating some pages which link to this page, and I come across a lot of things like "(artist) began his solo career" or "he released two solo albums." This usage is not mentioned on this page. Right now I'm unlinking them. Any better suggestions? Keppa 18:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Don't unlink them! Sorry for the exclamation, but I don't want you to do too much work going back and making the links. The appropriate link is to the article solo (music). If you take a look, it does discuss a solo career/album briefly. However, you do bring to attention that the disambiguation entry does not do a good job of describing that, which I will correct. -- Natalya 19:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Also, there are apparently two "Solo"s in the comic book world: one is a series by DC, and another is a character created by Marvel. If anyone has more information...Keppa 23:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hmm... thanks for pointing this out. I mistakenly reverted an edit recently because someone repeated the link to solo (comics). Turned out they were referring to the character, which is different (and just linked to the same article by mistake). I've added a reference to it to the disambiguation page, but until there's an article about it, I don't know about linking to it. I could see making it a red link, but with an article already called solo (comics), the parenthetical identifier would have to be different. Perhaps solo (comic book character)? -- Natalya 05:15, 23 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Solo (soft drink) should be moved to Solo (Australian soft drink). Solo (soft drink) should then either be a dab-page or redirect to Solo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.55.60.110 (talk) 06:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Does Solo Kleinmotoren GmbH (German Wikipedia: de:Solo Kleinmotoren, Google translation) meet the English Wikipedia's notability guidelines? With less than 200 employees and less than 40M Euro in sales (revenue?) in 2010, at first glance this is a very very weak candidate for a desirable red-link in a disambiguation page. This link fails DABRL on two counts: It is not used in any article (changing it to Solo Kleinmotoren would fix that problem as at least one article red-links to the company under that name), and it does not have a "blue link" (every line on a disambiguation page must have a "blue link"). @LeadSongDog:, as you recently added the link, can you support having this link in this list prior to an article about the company being created? Hopefully, you are working on an article so this will be a moot point within a couple of days. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Not sure about the time frame, but it should eventually be similar to Rotax. We have articles on individual engine models by other makers for use in aircraft, motorcycles, etc. I was not aware of the MOS:DABRL rule you mention, but if that is widely accepted practice, then wp:RED should say something of the sort. No objection to focussing on the products vice the company with or without GmbH. LeadSongDog come howl! 01:25, 26 September 2015 (UTC)Reply