I should also point out that the likelihood of any links pointing to either of the other two extensions is very low, considering neither have README files (both had their code on the page) and only the GitHub extension even had the extension page URL in the extension description.
*--* *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015 Major in Computer Science www.whizkidztech.com | [email protected] On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:25 AM, MZMcBride <[email protected]> wrote: > Matthew Flaschen wrote: > >On 02/07/2013 03:14 AM, MZMcBride wrote: > >> Sure, I picked "Gists". It didn't seem like a very difficult choice. All > >> cleaned up (redirected) now. > > > >I don't think that makes sense. If someone has a link to > >http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Gist from a README or something, > >they're now going to a different extension. > > > >You can propose deleting the others, but I think the redirects are > >somewhat misleading. > > The confusion caused by having three almost identical extensions > (particularly "Gist" v. "Gists") far exceeds the confusion caused by the > redirects (or broken links, if we deleted the documentation, as you > suggest). Even if we deleted the other extensions, both "Extension:Gist" > and "Extension:GitHub" are completely reasonable and warranted redirects > to "Extension:Gists", putting us exactly back to where we started. > > I've re-reverted your edits and added a note to the page explaining that > the other extensions were redirected/merged. > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
