Talk:FOB

Removed Useless Acronym

I removed an acronym for a Counter-Strike clan, as this is obviously not in widespread use and thus doesn't really belong on the disambaguation page. 162.53.103.225 03:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freight On Board

This should be "free on board". Obviously this person who wrote: "freight on board" has no clue about international nor domestic shipment transactions.

fob (plural fobs)

noun Definition:

1. chain for pocket watch: a chain or ribbon used to attach a pocket watch to a vest

2. ornament on key ring: an ornament attached to a key ring

3. ornament on chain: a watch or ornament worn on the end of a chain or ribbon attached to clothing

4. pocket for watch: a small pocket on a vest for a watch

5. electronic device for opening doors - a small portable electronic device that activates a door lock

[Mid-17th century. Origin ?]

Since there are so many meanings for this term, should we turn this into a disambiguation page? 76.64.185.147 03:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this IS a disambig page, although a badly written one which needs some cleanup, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages). NPalmius 00:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it is used by a subpopulation (Desi) of a subpopulation (students) of a single municipality (Toronto), than Fresh off Bloor is too obscure. Moc.aidepikiw 17:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ghetto FoBulous

People who are FoBBy and ghetto...e.g. speaks no english, greasy hair, listens to hip-hop music, wears tacky large jewelery/gold chains with large pendant representing his/her FoBBineSS, 20" rims on a Toyota Camry with large decal on rear window. Acts as though his "fobness" is non-existing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MRattu (talk • contribs) 04:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split or merge

I think FOB and Fob would be better off as a single dab page Fob. The reader who types "fob" into the "Go" box doesn't care that sometimes it's an acronym and sometimes it's a word. They're looking for an article. Let's help them find it, not make them jump through hoops. No? —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 16:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree with the sentiment there Drags. I am concerned mostly that there are redirects left right and centre that redirect to the DAB so the user, indeed, clicks a link and then it goes to a DAB which goes to another DAB and so forth. I have tried to clear these up a little but it is still a difficulty, and would be good to get consensus. Meanwhile I am taking a little of WP:BOLD and moving articles to have the same title as the page name' under WP:TITLE, I guess at some time in the past it was moved for example from Faecial to Fecal against WP:ENGVAR but cannot find it, but either way it is inconsistent, either the article title should match the lead or not. So a lot of gnoming along the way, please forgive the imperfections; that is exactly why I wanted others' opinions. It is always a bit tricky to know where to list, so I am quite happy if you know better than me.

Thank you and best wishes Si Trew (talk) 16:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that seems pretty perfect to me. Good work. I think my consise definitions serve the purpose, since you have not changed them. Seems great to me. Si Trew (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]