Difference between revisions of "Talk:Wegava Valley"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Reply) |
m (was a typo but it works for me!) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Regarding the last edit: "[...] Also lots of redlinks. (I know some links are repeated, but it's good to have them repeated in-context per section)" Last I checked, there is to be only one link per word (e.g. if Maya is written in the article, it is not to be linked every time). The first one mentioned, usually, is the one linked. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 15:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC) | Regarding the last edit: "[...] Also lots of redlinks. (I know some links are repeated, but it's good to have them repeated in-context per section)" Last I checked, there is to be only one link per word (e.g. if Maya is written in the article, it is not to be linked every time). The first one mentioned, usually, is the one linked. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 15:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I somewhat disagree, but let me pose a question. Why is it bad to have multiple links? I restrict the "multiple links to one article" to one link per section, and only in context. If you're reading about Razahr in the Flora and Fauna section, but the first link was up in the Society section, that seems very irksome to me. Of course I wouldn't do, say, "the [[Razahr]] leader lives in the [ | :I somewhat disagree, but let me pose a question. Why is it bad to have multiple links? I restrict the "multiple links to one article" to one link per section, and only in context. If you're reading about Razahr in the Flora and Fauna section, but the first link was up in the Society section, that seems very irksome to me. Of course I wouldn't do, say, "the [[Razahr]] leader lives in the [{Razahr}] caves to the south, with his [{Razahr}] mate [{Fela}]." That's incredibly idiotic (for many reasons), I agree. ^_^ | ||
:There really aren't that many repeated links here anyways, I made sure that if I put in another link it made sense. Like I skipped over the entire "Gnoll" and "Razahr" words in the inhabitants. ~[[User:Soludra|Soludra]] 18:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC) | :There really aren't that many repeated links here anyways, I made sure that if I put in another link it made sense. Like I skipped over the entire "Gnoll" and "Razahr" words in the inhabitants. ~[[User:Soludra|Soludra]] 18:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:09, 28 April 2009
Regarding the last edit: "[...] Also lots of redlinks. (I know some links are repeated, but it's good to have them repeated in-context per section)" Last I checked, there is to be only one link per word (e.g. if Maya is written in the article, it is not to be linked every time). The first one mentioned, usually, is the one linked. Asara 15:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- I somewhat disagree, but let me pose a question. Why is it bad to have multiple links? I restrict the "multiple links to one article" to one link per section, and only in context. If you're reading about Razahr in the Flora and Fauna section, but the first link was up in the Society section, that seems very irksome to me. Of course I wouldn't do, say, "the Razahr leader lives in the [{Razahr}] caves to the south, with his [{Razahr}] mate [{Fela}]." That's incredibly idiotic (for many reasons), I agree. ^_^
- There really aren't that many repeated links here anyways, I made sure that if I put in another link it made sense. Like I skipped over the entire "Gnoll" and "Razahr" words in the inhabitants. ~Soludra 18:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)