Guild Wars Wiki talk:Redirects

Starting

I support this policy. Its cumbersome on the guildwiki when you know what article you want to hit but because you missed a ! or a capital letter you don't land on it right away. Lojiin 09:41, 9 February 2007 (PST)

I am with you in pushing for more redirects, but the page reads like a help-file glossary (which it should be!), so I dont think it is correctly placed under policy proposals. --Xeeron 09:47, 9 February 2007 (PST)

Where should it be placed?--File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 10:31, 9 February 2007 (PST)

You are right Xeeron, I wrote it in a bit of a rush, and I thought policy proposals seemed to be the best place to put this, but perhaps not. LordBiro 10:37, 9 February 2007 (PST)

Lojiin - just an FYI: the policy on GuildWiki was updated a while ago - it permits most redirects. --Barek 11:50, 11 February 2007 (PST)

It could be placed in a (yet to be made?) Category:Editing or Category:Helping out (but I dislike 2 word categories) or any better term we can come up with. --Xeeron 12:10, 11 February 2007 (PST)

I think it should be re-written. In its current form, it's not a good policy article - but I do think it's worth while to have a policy on the allowable use of redirects. --Barek 12:12, 11 February 2007 (PST)

Why does the "Redirect" word need to be in full capital letters? Anyway, what do you should be rewritten? I can help but I'm not sure what you find lacking and in need of clarification or rewording. --ab.er.rant (talk) 17:31, 11 February 2007 (PST)

doesnt need to be in caps BlastedtGuildWiki page 17:45, 11 February 2007 (PST)

I agree this is more of a "how to" than a policy, and I wonder if we need an actual policy for it at all. Just include this in the general editing guide, and make it clear in the delete policy what kind of redirects are and aren't candidates for deletion. --NieA7 12:28, 13 February 2007 (PST)

I'd say this should be part of something like "Category:Editing guides" or "Category:Editing help". Xeeron, why would 2-word categories be a bad thing? I doubt you can reduce everything to single-word categories. NPC types already require more than 1 word. --ab.er.rant 18:16, 13 February 2007 (PST)

Wherever this ends up, I think it's probably still valid to discuss it here. The condition * Lower case names to properly capitalised names doesn't apply anymore, I don't think - the version of MediaWiki being used here automatically redirects that. Never mind, I was thinking of GuildWiki, which recently updated to the newest version of MediaWiki, but apparently the version used here is not the most current. I'll add that back in. I added some examples (as people always have an easier time understanding things with examples, even as simple as these concepts are - I had to think for a second to understand what "names without punctuation" meant). I also added the condition for shortname→complete name, as some redirects already exist for that (Kamadan), and it is very common for people to only know a nickname for things that have very long official names. —Dr Ishmael 20:12, 13 February 2007 (PST)

Actually, this site is using a slightly (barely) newer version of the MediaWiki software than GuildWiki. (GWW = v1.9.2, GW = v1.9.1). The redirects on two letter words in a search should still be automatic. The huristics search tries a few variations of caps automatically, and two letter words should always be caught; although three letter words still make sense to do as a redirect, especially if the correct version has mixed caps. I don't really mind two word redirects for caps, they don't really hurt anything, but there's no real benefit either. --Barek 20:21, 13 February 2007 (PST)

Hm, perhaps I was just being confused by those heuristics, then, because I can't seem to come up with an example that works at either site now (that doesn't already have a redirect page defined). Oh well. —Dr Ishmael 21:14, 13 February 2007 (PST)

Articles (language construct)

Should we redirect for pages with a starting article (a, an, the)? For all cases, including quests, not just locations. --ab.er.rant 22:45, 13 February 2007 (PST)

There's no reason not to. Whether we encourage it or not is a different matter. LordBiro 07:41, 5 March 2007 (EST)

revisit article

Should this content be merged into Guild Wars Wiki:Article retention? Also, should the list include an entry mentioning not to do redirects from other namespaces into either the guild or the user namespace? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 10:35, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I think the information regarding how to redirect should either stay here or be moved to an article dealing solely with help on redirects. I don't know if the help namespace is really used, so Help:Redirects might be no better than Guild Wars Wiki:Redirects.

I certainly think that redirects should be mentioned in the article retention policy. We need to make it clear from the outset that redirects are good. LordBiro 10:42, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

I agree that this isn't really a policy article - and you make a good case for it not being in the help namespace. But I suppose it could fit as a subpage of GWW:FORMAT - maybe GWW:FORMAT/REDIRECT? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:11, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

Moved the content to the new formatting guideline at Guild Wars Wiki:Formatting/Redirects and added the rejected tag. --Xeeron 09:43, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

Some redirects

Some redirects don't make sense. We have Hex Spell redirecting to Hex... with the word "Hex Spell" in the description. I have found a few of these from here. 72.148.31.114 18:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

The link that you gave is unfortunately from a different wiki, so I'm not sure if there is any issue we can address. G R E E N E R 20:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)