Talk:Order of Voln: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(Question about why a note on verification was removed from this article.) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
: Most terms should be linked, but only the first appearance needs to be linked unless the page is extremely long. I generally use once per two sections, since that's usually about enough to fill a screen. It's not a huge big deal, but articles just look silly when they've over-linked. |
: Most terms should be linked, but only the first appearance needs to be linked unless the page is extremely long. I generally use once per two sections, since that's usually about enough to fill a screen. It's not a huge big deal, but articles just look silly when they've over-linked. |
||
: [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 15:58, 28 November 2006 (EST) |
: [[User:Anshou|Oliver]] <sup>[[User talk:Anshou|Talk]]</sup> 15:58, 28 November 2006 (EST) |
||
Why was the verification note removed from this page? It's very important that this information is out of date. I and Sigurd haven't done research for like eight years... The note was: |
|||
NOTE: The following notes on favor are based on research performed in Gemstone III, not Gemstone IV. Facts about favor usage and costs should be re-verified. |
|||
I copied the style from the [[925]] page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. [[User:THIKKET|THIKKET]] 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST) |
|||
Revision as of 16:17, 28 November 2006
So one thing I've noticed about this page, you linked the living hell out of things. So you have a passage that's like this:
Where both favor and globe are linked excessively. On the style page it says you only need to link them the first time you use them. If it's a long page, and hasn't been linked in awhile you can link it again, but don't need to. On the other hand, I don't tend to link things nearly enough, so who knows. Rafi knows, but he doesn't contribute often enough. Also, I removed all the links to the levels of favor page because I think that that doesn't need its own page and directing to a favor page is fine. That's just my opinion though. Otherwise, good start on a very important page, and I learned some things checking it over, which is fun. justin talk 12:46, 28 November 2006 (EST)
Totally my bad. I'm very used to working on a mathematics page where every single time a term is referenced, it must be linked for clarity to at least a definition page, and at best a disambiguation page. It's super important for mathematics, I suppose, where every character can have a number of meanings. I'll clean up the links on this page and some of my other ones with this rule in mind later tonight. THIKKET 15:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)
- Most terms should be linked, but only the first appearance needs to be linked unless the page is extremely long. I generally use once per two sections, since that's usually about enough to fill a screen. It's not a huge big deal, but articles just look silly when they've over-linked.
- Oliver Talk 15:58, 28 November 2006 (EST)
Why was the verification note removed from this page? It's very important that this information is out of date. I and Sigurd haven't done research for like eight years... The note was: NOTE: The following notes on favor are based on research performed in Gemstone III, not Gemstone IV. Facts about favor usage and costs should be re-verified. I copied the style from the 925 page. I think it should remain, but I don't know if there's a rule against this. Please respond. THIKKET 17:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)