Talk:AGIDEX: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:Actually, if you look, there is a comment about AGIDEX on the [[roundtime]] article, further reducing the need for this article to even exist, hence why it was redirected. This really seems like an odd thing to go out of your way to revert over. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 19:20, 18 August 2006 (EDT) |
:Actually, if you look, there is a comment about AGIDEX on the [[roundtime]] article, further reducing the need for this article to even exist, hence why it was redirected. This really seems like an odd thing to go out of your way to revert over. -[[User:BELATHUS|Andy]] <sup>[[User talk:BELATHUS|talk]]</sup> 19:20, 18 August 2006 (EDT) |
||
Especially since 100% of the non-Oliver people that contribute to KP with any regularity think that it is best redirected to RT. But maybe we combined don't hold enough stock to override your one vote. [[User:ALKALOIDS|justin]] <sup>[[User talk:ALKALOIDS|talk]]</sup> 19:35, 18 August 2006 (EDT) |
Revision as of 17:35, 18 August 2006
I don't agree with this page redirecting to the Roundtime article, as it previously provided an explanation of the term, which is entirely absent from the roundtime page, and though is primarily tied to the calculation of combat roundtime, is still its own entity deserving of its own page. The change to redirct essentially removed a bit of helpful information while adding a confusing equation of roundtime and the AGIDEX term. In general, redirects should only exist for terms that are either alternate names of the articles being redirected to (think Elf, elves, elven, etc.), or so intrinsically tied to the subject matter being redirected to as to be explicitly documented there. I'll be reverting this article to its last verion unless a compelling reason to change this is brought up. - Oliver Talk 15:29, 18 August 2006 (EDT)
- Actually, if you look, there is a comment about AGIDEX on the roundtime article, further reducing the need for this article to even exist, hence why it was redirected. This really seems like an odd thing to go out of your way to revert over. -Andy talk 19:20, 18 August 2006 (EDT)
Especially since 100% of the non-Oliver people that contribute to KP with any regularity think that it is best redirected to RT. But maybe we combined don't hold enough stock to override your one vote. justin talk 19:35, 18 August 2006 (EDT)