Difference between revisions of "Talk:Battle of Kashyyyk"
(→Removing Links) |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
I would be interested to hear more opinions on this. As we generally try to follow Wikipedia standards (partially to make things easier), what you did is good. At the same time, I have doubts about linking only once. I rarely read a full article on Wikipedia, I very often only read a section of it. So in my personal opinion the rule to only link once is not helpful at all.--[[User:Dreighton|Dreighton]] 02:46, 15 December 2011 (GMT) | I would be interested to hear more opinions on this. As we generally try to follow Wikipedia standards (partially to make things easier), what you did is good. At the same time, I have doubts about linking only once. I rarely read a full article on Wikipedia, I very often only read a section of it. So in my personal opinion the rule to only link once is not helpful at all.--[[User:Dreighton|Dreighton]] 02:46, 15 December 2011 (GMT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I also look for links within a section so a viable guideline would be to ensure that the articles is divided adequately into readable sections (3-4 paragraphs) and each section should have the link once for the ease of navigating.--[[User:Raith Starlight|Raith Starlight]] 03:54, 15 December 2011 (GMT) | ||
Revision as of 22:54, 14 December 2011
Rebel/Republican
IIRC this happened when the New Republic was still the Rebel Alliance, but I can't remember? Orphaea Imperium 02:44, 2 March 2011 (GMT)
- It was after they became the New Republic, designated as Operation Forging Freedom Carn`ilo` Sabosen 03:02, 2 March 2011 (GMT)
Removing Links
I just removed many of the links to conform to: WP:Overlink. So generally I suppose we follow the policy of "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, and at the first occurrence after the lead"?! Qatar Shendo 16:07, 13 December 2011 (GMT)
Thank you Qatar! My intention in linking was to clarify and allow the reader (be it a beginner, a guest or veteran) to expand their knowledge about the subject if the reader did not know what happened, and if the page did not exist to create that page in due time for the reader to fully understand it. However I do agree that I overlinked, as I had intended to keep polishing it, as in writing I find it is sometimes better to write it and then take away then to not do it at all. --Vlape Helprin 04:20, 14 December 2011 (GMT)
- I figured I would help and make the page easier to read, I hope I didn't destroy any of your work as I love the article itself! Qatar Shendo 14:39, 14 December 2011 (GMT)
I would be interested to hear more opinions on this. As we generally try to follow Wikipedia standards (partially to make things easier), what you did is good. At the same time, I have doubts about linking only once. I rarely read a full article on Wikipedia, I very often only read a section of it. So in my personal opinion the rule to only link once is not helpful at all.--Dreighton 02:46, 15 December 2011 (GMT)
- I also look for links within a section so a viable guideline would be to ensure that the articles is divided adequately into readable sections (3-4 paragraphs) and each section should have the link once for the ease of navigating.--Raith Starlight 03:54, 15 December 2011 (GMT)
