Talk:Legolas - Revision history

Mithbot: Bot Message: changing link to Legolas

2010-07-01T10:25:52Z

Bot Message: changing link to Legolas

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:25, 1 July 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	The current links in this redirect lead to articles named "Legolas of Mirkwood" and "Legolas of Gondolin". Shouldn't it, in compliance with the standards, be "Legolas (Elf of Mirkwood)" and "Legolas (Elf of Gondolin)"? Also, I've noticed [[Legolas Greenleaf]] redirects to the Mirkwood one, but the Gondolin one was also called Greenleaf, so shouldn't that redirect here as well? -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 09:26, 19 August 2008 (EDT)	+	The current links in this redirect lead to articles named "Legolas of Mirkwood" and "Legolas of Gondolin". Shouldn't it, in compliance with the standards, be "Legolas (Elf of Mirkwood)" and "Legolas (Elf of Gondolin)"? Also, I've noticed [[Legolas\|Legolas Greenleaf]] redirects to the Mirkwood one, but the Gondolin one was also called Greenleaf, so shouldn't that redirect here as well? -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 09:26, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

	:"In this <strike>redirect</strike>" disambig, yes? (Making sure I understood you correctly) If so, it is the same situation in [[Ecthelion]]'s case and for all the articles attached to it. Or [[Míriel]]'s. And there are more like them. It seems that, whatever the standars may be in the case of same name articles, we have more examples against the rule, than following it... ~~ [[User:Þelma\|Þelma]] 10:49, 19 August 2008 (EDT)		:"In this <strike>redirect</strike>" disambig, yes? (Making sure I understood you correctly) If so, it is the same situation in [[Ecthelion]]'s case and for all the articles attached to it. Or [[Míriel]]'s. And there are more like them. It seems that, whatever the standars may be in the case of same name articles, we have more examples against the rule, than following it... ~~ [[User:Þelma\|Þelma]] 10:49, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

	::Those don't break the (non-existent) rule. It's just that both Legolas'ses do have an epithet - but it's the same, and nowhere are they referred to as "Legolas of Mirkwood" (unless "Legolas of the Woodland Realm" qualifies) or "Legolas of Gondolin". Hence the [[Beregond\|renaming]]. -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 11:14, 19 August 2008 (EDT)		::Those don't break the (non-existent) rule. It's just that both Legolas'ses do have an epithet - but it's the same, and nowhere are they referred to as "Legolas of Mirkwood" (unless "Legolas of the Woodland Realm" qualifies) or "Legolas of Gondolin". Hence the [[Beregond\|renaming]]. -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 11:14, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

Ederchil: reply

2008-08-19T15:14:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:14, 19 August 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	:"In this <strike>redirect</strike>" disambig, yes? (Making sure I understood you correctly) If so, it is the same situation in [[Ecthelion]]'s case and for all the articles attached to it. Or [[Míriel]]'s. And there are more like them. It seems that, whatever the standars may be in the case of same name articles, we have more examples against the rule, than following it... ~~ [[User:Þelma\|Þelma]] 10:49, 19 August 2008 (EDT)		:"In this <strike>redirect</strike>" disambig, yes? (Making sure I understood you correctly) If so, it is the same situation in [[Ecthelion]]'s case and for all the articles attached to it. Or [[Míriel]]'s. And there are more like them. It seems that, whatever the standars may be in the case of same name articles, we have more examples against the rule, than following it... ~~ [[User:Þelma\|Þelma]] 10:49, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
		+
		+	::Those don't break the (non-existent) rule. It's just that both Legolas'ses do have an epithet - but it's the same, and nowhere are they referred to as "Legolas of Mirkwood" (unless "Legolas of the Woodland Realm" qualifies) or "Legolas of Gondolin". Hence the [[Beregond\|renaming]]. -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 11:14, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

Þelma at 14:49, 19 August 2008

2008-08-19T14:49:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:49, 19 August 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The current links in this redirect lead to articles named "Legolas of Mirkwood" and "Legolas of Gondolin". Shouldn't it, in compliance with the standards, be "Legolas (Elf of Mirkwood)" and "Legolas (Elf of Gondolin)"? Also, I've noticed [[Legolas Greenleaf]] redirects to the Mirkwood one, but the Gondolin one was also called Greenleaf, so shouldn't that redirect here as well? -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 09:26, 19 August 2008 (EDT)		The current links in this redirect lead to articles named "Legolas of Mirkwood" and "Legolas of Gondolin". Shouldn't it, in compliance with the standards, be "Legolas (Elf of Mirkwood)" and "Legolas (Elf of Gondolin)"? Also, I've noticed [[Legolas Greenleaf]] redirects to the Mirkwood one, but the Gondolin one was also called Greenleaf, so shouldn't that redirect here as well? -- [[User:Ederchil\|Ederchil]] 09:26, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
		+
		+	:"In this <strike>redirect</strike>" disambig, yes? (Making sure I understood you correctly) If so, it is the same situation in [[Ecthelion]]'s case and for all the articles attached to it. Or [[Míriel]]'s. And there are more like them. It seems that, whatever the standars may be in the case of same name articles, we have more examples against the rule, than following it... ~~ [[User:Þelma\|Þelma]] 10:49, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

Ederchil: naming and redirection

2008-08-19T13:26:12Z

naming and redirection

New page

The current links in this redirect lead to articles named "Legolas of Mirkwood" and "Legolas of Gondolin". Shouldn't it, in compliance with the standards, be "Legolas (Elf of Mirkwood)" and "Legolas (Elf of Gondolin)"? Also, I've noticed [[Legolas Greenleaf]] redirects to the Mirkwood one, but the Gondolin one was also called Greenleaf, so shouldn't that redirect here as well? -- [[User:Ederchil|Ederchil]] 09:26, 19 August 2008 (EDT)