Forums:Redirecting secondary names: Difference between revisions
From Tolkien Gateway
m (Redirect) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
::+1 on redirecting also. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 19:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | ::+1 on redirecting also. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 19:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC) | ||
:::+1 on redirecting. As Ederchil says, the choice may be arbitrary but it's better than two or more articles on the same subject, which often contain or omit different information. --[[User:Gamling|Gamling}} 21:10, 6 Sept. 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:11, 6 September 2011
Tolkien Gateway > Forums > Redirecting secondary names
It was agreed at the 7 August 2011 meeting (indeed this was also agreed at the 3 July 2011 meeting but no action was taken) that we should conduct this discussion here. Should we have one article per concept, redirecting all secondary names to one article? Or should we continue to have many articles for the same concept, and, if so, what guidelines should be in place? -- KingAragorn talk contribs edits email 14:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- +1 to redirecting. We might have sections dealing to specific names (for example, Strider and Thorongil on Aragorn's page). If it's just the name in another language, we should redirect to the best known name (arbitrary, I know). --Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 15:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- +1 on redirecting. As Ederchil says, the choice may be arbitrary but it's better than two or more articles on the same subject, which often contain or omit different information. --[[User:Gamling|Gamling}} 21:10, 6 Sept. 2011 (UTC)
