User talk:Raltseye

Welcome

Hello, Raltseye, and welcome to Pikipedia! If you need ideas on how to help, please check the Helping out page. For a beginner's guide on how to edit pages, check the Quick start guide. Finally, if you need to talk to one of us, there's the Chatroom. Thanks for joining us, and we hope you enjoy your stay! Marty (talk) 11:03, 21 April 2016 (EDT)

Redirect links

Hey there! Good work on cleaning up some of the dirtier links on the wiki. Although, I have something to point out. When you've got links to redirect pages in an article's body, it may be best to leave it like that (unless it's something ridiculous like a redirect to a redirect). Some years back, I too tried to do the same wherever I could. But then I read somewhere (probably a talk page on Wikipedia) about how that's not necessarily a good thing, and I changed my view ever since.

Basically, the only advantage to linking directly to a redirect's final target is server convenience, but even then, the server barely cares. It's indifferent for the reader, since they reach the final destination instantly either way, but it makes things a bit worse for editors. It's easier to read the source code when you've got something like thirty [[fireflies]] compared to thirty [[Firefly|fireflies]]. Further, although most of our "subject" redirects just point to a larger "subject" article that contains a section on that minor subject, there could come a day where we want to make it a full article. For instance, if we want to make a full article out of the "Charge" mechanic in Pikmin 3 instead of keeping it as a section. If everything links to [[charge]] anyway, the work is cut out for us.

There's also the fact that you can do something like [[dogs]] -> [[dog]]s, which is still easy to read, and skips the redirect, but registering a new edit on the changelog of a page, and on the recent changes, just for that virtually useless edit is... well, it's a bit of a bummer. It's not wrong, and I won't stop you from continuing, but I can point you to the Helping out page if you need ideas on other, more palpable tasks that the wiki needs. Same goes for removing "File:" in galleries. It makes them just a bit easier to read, but again, the overhead of registering a new edit just for that is almost not worth it.

Still, let me know your thoughts on what I said. Oh, and remember that this isn't a warning or anything of the sort! — {Espyo^T} 08:05, 4 October 2016 (EDT)

Oh I see. Well then I'll stop removing File: from galleries. When it comes to redirects I think it looks better as a reader to click on a link and not see a redirect, that might just be me however. I'll try to think about what it's linking to and then from there judge if it's worth it like you said if you create a page for that subjet you have to change back all the links again. I'm sorry if I do anything against any rules you might have here, I'm used to the rules at Bulbapedia and might remove things and such because of the notability policies we have there, just tell me if I do. That [[dog]]s thing I already know of, it's a very handy thing to be able to do indeed. --Raltseye (talk) 06:14, 7 October 2016 (EDT)

No worries! I understand that it's hard to get used to different rules. Honestly, what I said earlier isn't a rule, it's more of a weird thing that I figured could be addressed better. However, if you are editing an article for some relevant reason, you're more than welcome to remove File: from galleries whilst you're there. I might even add that to Pikan to encourage more people to do it while they're editing. — {Espyo^T} 07:47, 7 October 2016 (EDT)