Help talk:Disambiguation

On definition disambiguation pages, should the Definition: prefix be visible in the links or not? --barto (talk) 08:10, 2 September 2017 (EDT)

I think it's cleaner and improves readability if we hide them. --barto (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
It may be useful for the reader to know that a page referenced is a definition rather than a proof. This is why the "Definition" namespace is left in place in "Also see" sections. --prime mover (talk) 08:52, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
I agree for the "also see" section. What about disambiguations? Compare Definition:Complete and Definition:Open. --barto (talk) 08:57, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
As I say, it may be useful, which explains the reference to Also see sections. --prime mover (talk) 08:58, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
All right, then since at a definition dismabiguation page everything is a definition, Definition: becomes superfluous and can be omitted. --barto (talk) 09:18, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
Whatever, you're the boss. --prime mover (talk) 11:21, 2 September 2017 (EDT)

If I look at what happened to Definition:Complete as a result of this discussion, then I'm not really happy... I think it is because we are moving away from disambiguation as a means to link to an *exactly identified page*, which is made clear by including that page's full name. The lesson to draw from Definition:Open is that it may be beneficial to have more short descriptions of what is being linked to. I would be happier with the old convention. — Lord_Farin (talk) 14:58, 4 September 2017 (EDT)

Hmm... yes, I see what you mean. Just to make sure we all know what we're talking about, with "old convention" you mean including Namespace:? Are you fine with hiding the namespace if there's a short description for all links? The only reason I think of hiding the namespace is readability. Another idea is to hide the namespace but emphasize in the disambiguation intro text that all links below are definitions:
Complete may refer to the following definitions:
or something. --barto (talk) 16:13, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
If it ain't broken, don't fix it. --prime mover (talk) 16:32, 4 September 2017 (EDT)

Given everything written, I still prefer to include the namespace on the grounds of unambiguous reference to the page (after all, this is what disambiguation pages are for). The text is a nice addition, but should ideally be independent of the page title. Like so: