Talk:Firefox (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 articles

Mammals

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles

Removing a link without known relevance[edit]

There wasn't anything on the Roni Size to explain the connection to "Firefox", so I removed the link. gK ¿?]] 09:10, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

animals[edit]

I'm not sure the animals should be mentioned here at all. The English name "firefox" is not being used for any animals, except when discussing the browser name. As for the Chinese name, it can refer to the red for or the red panda, see Talk:Red Panda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuzzy Logic (talk • contribs) 23:10, 26 January 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The creative usage of the literal translation of the Chinese, 火狐, in English predates Mozila Firefox (there were over 200 examples of this usage on Google before the name change of the browser), which has now popularised it to a level where I think it probably should be mentioned.

As an aside, does anyone know why zh:火狐 goes to a page about the browser without any sign of a disambiguating hatnote? (Note: I don't even have any Chinese fonts installed so I cannot even see let alone read the ideographics on that page). Also, although the red panda article over there (zh:小熊猫) has 火狐 at the top of the page, the red fox one (zh:赤狐) doesn't contain that string. Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley _talk _contrib 21:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence is there that "fire fox" has anything to do with Chinese? The connection of fire with the color of a fox is too obvious to be plausibly borrowed. The idea is already present in the bible story of Samson using flaming foxes as weapons: Judges 15:4 (KJV) reads "And Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took firebrands, and turned tail to tail, and put a firebrand in the midst between two tails." If no real evidence of borrowing from Chinese is provided I'll delete that line. Perchloric (talk) 03:33, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox Ltd[edit]

Anyone know if there's a Wikipedia entry on Firefox ltd (http://firefox.co.uk/)? I added Fiefox Ltd to the lsit of meanings, but i don't see an entry on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OSborn (talk • contribs) 05:55, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Foxfire[edit]

Foxfire has many meanings and therefore a link to the disambiguation page is enough, I removed the single explanation of Foxfire as a bioluminescence from a forest fungus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfsamper (talk • contribs) 19:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mozilla Firefox and Firefox[edit]

Hello There is a discussion going on at the Firefox redirect (see Talk:Firefox) about the position of Mozilla Firefox on this page, and whether Firefox should redirect here or to Mozilla Firefox. Please feel free to join in the discussion there. --H2g2bob 23:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And don't try to invite people whom you feel would support your cause, it's against Wikipedia policy. Jameihd 20:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this page not relevant to the discussion. It is after all the page you insist on redirecting to. Ansell 23:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you're probably referring to my notifying of both Ansell (here) and an anonymous editor (here), who both edited the Firefox redirect page (history) while it was disputed that there was discussion going on at the talk page (I feel this is apropriate as there are no disputed tags on that page). These people both had opposing views. If this was against the rules, then I apologise. --H2g2bob 23:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason the talk page was removed before I had a look, so I recreated a discussion (i.e. I started a new one), since I'm not that happy with the current solution. Are there any discussions anywhere else? Shell-man 02:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]