On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
> On 7 February 2011 17:46, Carcharoth wrote:
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:KCwithOL
>>
>> That template alone accounts for hundreds of links. Uncollapse the
>> sections to see how many there are. Maybe there should be a limit to
>>
On 7 February 2011 19:26, Andrew Gray wrote:
> On 7 February 2011 17:46, Carcharoth wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:KCwithOL
>> That template alone accounts for hundreds of links. Uncollapse the
>> sections to see how many there are. Maybe there should be a limit to
>> the number
On 7 February 2011 17:46, Carcharoth wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:KCwithOL
>
> That template alone accounts for hundreds of links. Uncollapse the
> sections to see how many there are. Maybe there should be a limit to
> the number of links allows in a single template?
Are we not
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Magnus Manske
wrote:
> For years it was slightly bugging me that the "Most wanted articles"
> function is deactivated. On en.wp, the last cache was generated in
> October 2009.
>
> Well, I cooked an alternative. Listing all non-existing articles that
> have at leas
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Magnus Manske
wrote:
> Many of these links are due to templates, which I can do little about.
> I hope it will still be useful to some.
I took a closer look, and realised what you mean.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:KCwithOL
That template alone accounts
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Charles Matthews
wrote:
> Put it this way: if the navbox were a list, it would contribute once to
> counting such a redlink,
> which wouldn't distort the priorities in the same fashion.
Indeed. And navbox footer templates are effectively just
lists/categories tra
On 07/02/2011 15:38, Ian Woollard wrote:
> On 06/02/2011, Magnus Manske wrote:
>> Many of these links are due to templates, which I can do little about.
>> I hope it will still be useful to some.
> Is that necessarily a problem in this case?
>
> We still will have pages, that are potentially click
On 06/02/2011, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Many of these links are due to templates, which I can do little about.
> I hope it will still be useful to some.
Is that necessarily a problem in this case?
We still will have pages, that are potentially clickable from a large
number of articles, that don't
On 7 February 2011 04:10, David Goodman wrote:
> agreed. The footer templates are the biggest source of linkage bloat.
> the templates are useful, and we need some way of keeping track of
> what should be in them when we add or delete articles, but they make
> working with what links here for any
Done - thanks
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bob the
Wikipedian
Sent: 06 February 2011 18:48
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Deletionist wanted for hire
It would appear to me your email
Some company wants to delete their competition's Wikipedia articles ?
Delete its own article to clear controversies ? :)
Somebody wants to try a sting operation , to find what kind of articles they
want to delete ? Will be very interesting!
Regards
Tinu Cherian
-Original Message-
From:
It would appear to me your email account is set up to use the name
"wiki". Try altering it and see if that does anything.
Bob
On 2/6/2011 8:40 AM, wiki wrote:
> It would be instructive to know what articles they are worried about and
> why. I find that most people wanting articles deleted have a
12 matches
Mail list logo
