Hi Gettinwikiwidit! The thread you created at the
Wikipedia:Teahouse, My account appears to keep resetting, has been
archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion
here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.
why it was necessary to add yet another link to the Theodore Roosevelt article with
this edit. There are now 8 Wikilinks to Roosevelt in the article (2 of which are in the Infobox), so I need to understand why it was necessary to add another one. Thanks,
Shearonink (
talk)
00:50, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
It makes this document consistent with the other Presidents. The consistency helps tools like DBPedia parsing. It's also worth asking, why not have the extra link? Is this anything more than personal preference?
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
00:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
I asked because I wanted to know - I figured you had to have some sort of reason for doing so - yay for DBpedia, a project I was now and still remain unfamiliar with - since you performed a similar edit on so many other US Presidential articles. Also, not a matter of personal preference, it's in the MOS, at
MOS:DUPLINK.
Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in
infoboxes, tables, image captions,
footnotes,
hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead.
I see your point about Infoboxes, it's just that so many times repeated links creep into an article and duplicate linking is usually to be avoided. I'm not sure that DBpedia must have every mention of a person within an infobox Wikilinked/hyperlinked but, then again, technical aspects of WP are not my main jam, editing and writing are.
Shearonink (
talk)
03:35, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Shearonink: No worries. I've tried to explain why they're useful in infoboxes. I'm not sure I understand why they're to be avoided elsewhere. Is the difference in highlighting distracting in the body of the text? Does it make it less usable for the visually impaired? I'm honestly not trying to force my viewpoint, but if I understood the reasoning I could factor it in to my decisions. Moreover, I intend to respect the style standards. If that's the only reason, I can appreciate that as well, but as I say I have respected the standard as written. Regards,
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
07:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Other than infoboxes, it's the MOS/style standard for Wikipedia articles to have the first instance of mentioning another WP article to be hyperlinked. I suppose you could look at the talk page for the MOS:Linking to see how that standard was arrived at but it's been that way ever since I started editing back in the 2010s. Makes sense to me, I think repeated linking of an article can be visually jarring to readers.
Shearonink (
talk)
13:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
To use the McKinley article as an example. It's more important to link that Theodore Roosevelt was McKinley successor as president, rather then his having been McKinley vice president.
GoodDay (
talk)
02:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GoodDay: Is this a principle articulated in the MOS? I don't see it there. As mentioned above, duplicate links are explicitly allowed in the MOS for "readers" which I take to mean tools such as DBpedia mentioned in my commit message.
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
06:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GoodDay: To be clear, I don't recognize you as an authority. Please discontinue this conversation as it is unwelcome. Further posts will be considered harassment. Regards,
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
00:43, 15 July 2021 (UTC)reply
You pinged me here, with your questions. Now you're complaining that I'm responding to your questions. Please then, stop pinging me. PS - I don't like your attitude.
GoodDay (
talk)
00:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Gettinwikiwidit! The thread you created at the
Wikipedia:Teahouse, My account appears to keep resetting, has been
archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion
here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.
why it was necessary to add yet another link to the Theodore Roosevelt article with
this edit. There are now 8 Wikilinks to Roosevelt in the article (2 of which are in the Infobox), so I need to understand why it was necessary to add another one. Thanks,
Shearonink (
talk)
00:50, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
It makes this document consistent with the other Presidents. The consistency helps tools like DBPedia parsing. It's also worth asking, why not have the extra link? Is this anything more than personal preference?
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
00:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
I asked because I wanted to know - I figured you had to have some sort of reason for doing so - yay for DBpedia, a project I was now and still remain unfamiliar with - since you performed a similar edit on so many other US Presidential articles. Also, not a matter of personal preference, it's in the MOS, at
MOS:DUPLINK.
Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, a link may be repeated in
infoboxes, tables, image captions,
footnotes,
hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead.
I see your point about Infoboxes, it's just that so many times repeated links creep into an article and duplicate linking is usually to be avoided. I'm not sure that DBpedia must have every mention of a person within an infobox Wikilinked/hyperlinked but, then again, technical aspects of WP are not my main jam, editing and writing are.
Shearonink (
talk)
03:35, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Shearonink: No worries. I've tried to explain why they're useful in infoboxes. I'm not sure I understand why they're to be avoided elsewhere. Is the difference in highlighting distracting in the body of the text? Does it make it less usable for the visually impaired? I'm honestly not trying to force my viewpoint, but if I understood the reasoning I could factor it in to my decisions. Moreover, I intend to respect the style standards. If that's the only reason, I can appreciate that as well, but as I say I have respected the standard as written. Regards,
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
07:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Other than infoboxes, it's the MOS/style standard for Wikipedia articles to have the first instance of mentioning another WP article to be hyperlinked. I suppose you could look at the talk page for the MOS:Linking to see how that standard was arrived at but it's been that way ever since I started editing back in the 2010s. Makes sense to me, I think repeated linking of an article can be visually jarring to readers.
Shearonink (
talk)
13:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)reply
To use the McKinley article as an example. It's more important to link that Theodore Roosevelt was McKinley successor as president, rather then his having been McKinley vice president.
GoodDay (
talk)
02:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GoodDay: Is this a principle articulated in the MOS? I don't see it there. As mentioned above, duplicate links are explicitly allowed in the MOS for "readers" which I take to mean tools such as DBpedia mentioned in my commit message.
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
06:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GoodDay: To be clear, I don't recognize you as an authority. Please discontinue this conversation as it is unwelcome. Further posts will be considered harassment. Regards,
Gettinwikiwidit (
talk)
00:43, 15 July 2021 (UTC)reply
You pinged me here, with your questions. Now you're complaining that I'm responding to your questions. Please then, stop pinging me. PS - I don't like your attitude.
GoodDay (
talk)
00:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.