< October 22 | October 24 > |
---|
The result of the discussion was Speedy delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Unused and unuseful. ✤ JonHarder talk 23:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Per discussion
here,
here and
here, seperate links to both city and state are regarded as a case of
WP:OVERLINK. Concensus favours a single and simpler link such as [[Kennewick, Washington]]
rather than [[Kennewick, Washington|Kennewick]], [[Washington (U.S. state)|Washington]]
. This had been a redirect to {{
city-state}} (also at Tfd) until reverted a few months ago.
PC78 (
talk) 13:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
[[Kennewick, Washington]]
form; if anyone really doesn't understand what the state reference means (which is plausible), they'll just find it via the article in question instead. (Probably the easiest way to implement this is to edit the template, then subst it, then delete.) --
ais523 13:46, 28 October 2010 (
U
T
C)< October 22 | October 24 > |
---|
The result of the discussion was Speedy delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Unused and unuseful. ✤ JonHarder talk 23:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Per discussion
here,
here and
here, seperate links to both city and state are regarded as a case of
WP:OVERLINK. Concensus favours a single and simpler link such as [[Kennewick, Washington]]
rather than [[Kennewick, Washington|Kennewick]], [[Washington (U.S. state)|Washington]]
. This had been a redirect to {{
city-state}} (also at Tfd) until reverted a few months ago.
PC78 (
talk) 13:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
[[Kennewick, Washington]]
form; if anyone really doesn't understand what the state reference means (which is plausible), they'll just find it via the article in question instead. (Probably the easiest way to implement this is to edit the template, then subst it, then delete.) --
ais523 13:46, 28 October 2010 (
U
T
C)