This sort of thing is happening a bit lately. It strikes me as
possibly a somewhat more manageable form of expert participation than
throwing individual well-meaning experts into a wiki cagefight with
individual persistent idiots. How's the community tending to treat
such groups?
- d.
On 04/04/2011 12:56, Carcharoth wrote:
So is there anyway to encourage or help with whatever needs to be done here?
Have a look at [[Template:Protected Areas of Massachusetts]], for
example. This nearly doubled in size early in 2011, with a couple of
hundred red links added.
What we have here
On 04/04/2011, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Have a look at [[Template:Protected Areas of Massachusetts]], for
example. This nearly doubled in size early in 2011, with a couple of
hundred red links added.
What we have here is quadratic: if it is assumed all those
On 04/04/2011 11:56, David Gerard wrote:
This sort of thing is happening a bit lately. It strikes me as
possibly a somewhat more manageable form of expert participation than
throwing individual well-meaning experts into a wiki cagefight with
individual persistent idiots. How's the community
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
Basically, what matters here is readability and usefulness.
And knowing how many links are from within templates and how many from
within the actual text of an article is not useful? What links here
is a useful tool for
I agree entirely with Carcharoth, and have been having the same thoughts for
the past year. It's not even possible to momentarily delete an article from
a template in order to see what other articles actually link to it, because
the what links here can take days to update fully. It'd be really
