Help talk:Disambiguation: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Rosicrucian (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Rosicrucian (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
I had two disambiguation pages speedy-deleted when I was following the rule "Even if there are only two articles, if you can't decide which is more important, you should make a disambig page and redirect to it." I think that is a good guideline, but if that is not how things are actually done the guideline should be changed. Should two-article disambiguation pages be forbidden? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 14:36, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | I had two disambiguation pages speedy-deleted when I was following the rule "Even if there are only two articles, if you can't decide which is more important, you should make a disambig page and redirect to it." I think that is a good guideline, but if that is not how things are actually done the guideline should be changed. Should two-article disambiguation pages be forbidden? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 14:36, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:From what I understand, the reason we've avoided them is because there's no point. If you arrive at the wrong article, it should always have a disambig tag to direct you to the other one. Thus, it's the same amount of clicks regardless.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 14:39, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | :From what I understand, the reason we've avoided them is because there's no point. If you arrive at the wrong article, it should always have a disambig tag to direct you to the other one. Thus, it's the same amount of clicks regardless.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 14:39, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::And the other issue is that you made these disambig pages and changed the redirects without fixing pages that used the redirects. So now there's a bunch of pages that link to a disambig page rather than the proper article as a result.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 14:42, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 18:42, 6 September 2009
Two article disambiguation pages.
I had two disambiguation pages speedy-deleted when I was following the rule "Even if there are only two articles, if you can't decide which is more important, you should make a disambig page and redirect to it." I think that is a good guideline, but if that is not how things are actually done the guideline should be changed. Should two-article disambiguation pages be forbidden? - Starfield 14:36, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
- From what I understand, the reason we've avoided them is because there's no point. If you arrive at the wrong article, it should always have a disambig tag to direct you to the other one. Thus, it's the same amount of clicks regardless.--RosicrucianTalk 14:39, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
- And the other issue is that you made these disambig pages and changed the redirects without fixing pages that used the redirects. So now there's a bunch of pages that link to a disambig page rather than the proper article as a result.--RosicrucianTalk 14:42, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
