Talk:Charna (prime): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (GS4-XERAPHINA moved page Talk:Charna Ja'Varrel'Kav to Talk:Charna (prime): moving to updated player character page naming convention) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
It is a waste of time to make changes such as that you've just made. Besides, if the page gets moved, that means you'll have to change the damned thing again. Another point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_link. Of course, you seem to often make the point that this isn't Wikipedia, but I do feel that this is a valid reason not to use the brackets, not to mention, it is so insignificant that... why are we even talking about this? -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 22:47, 4 June 2006 (EDT) |
It is a waste of time to make changes such as that you've just made. Besides, if the page gets moved, that means you'll have to change the damned thing again. Another point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_link. Of course, you seem to often make the point that this isn't Wikipedia, but I do feel that this is a valid reason not to use the brackets, not to mention, it is so insignificant that... why are we even talking about this? -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 22:47, 4 June 2006 (EDT) |
||
Hey, I can waste me time how I please, thank you very much! :) If the article gets moved, then the bolded area would need to be changed in any case, since the article title would now be different. Using brackets ensures the text is properly marked up, be that bold or a link, regardless of where it is. I'm not sure how "Do not use self-links to make the article name bold in the first paragraph;" qualifies as a valid reason not to use brackets. Wikipedia made an arbitrary decision to not use self link in this manner, and I made an equally arbitrary decision to use them in this manner. [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 05:40, 7 June 2006 (EDT) |
|||
:I disagree. The bolded area and the exact title do not always, and should not always, match. Anyway, I've cited my reasons for my inability to agree on this issue. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 01:34, 10 June 2006 (EDT) |
|||
Latest revision as of 18:58, 17 November 2020
It is a waste of time to make changes such as that you've just made. Besides, if the page gets moved, that means you'll have to change the damned thing again. Another point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_link. Of course, you seem to often make the point that this isn't Wikipedia, but I do feel that this is a valid reason not to use the brackets, not to mention, it is so insignificant that... why are we even talking about this? -Andy talk 22:47, 4 June 2006 (EDT)
Hey, I can waste me time how I please, thank you very much! :) If the article gets moved, then the bolded area would need to be changed in any case, since the article title would now be different. Using brackets ensures the text is properly marked up, be that bold or a link, regardless of where it is. I'm not sure how "Do not use self-links to make the article name bold in the first paragraph;" qualifies as a valid reason not to use brackets. Wikipedia made an arbitrary decision to not use self link in this manner, and I made an equally arbitrary decision to use them in this manner. Oliver Talk 05:40, 7 June 2006 (EDT)