Whatever it is going to be, please make a decision. At the moment, the
nb: / no: issue is causing edit wars by bots. This is definitely not a
contribution to wikipedia.
For the time being, I suggest not to make any changes automatically, and
let the operators select no: or nb: by hand. Both links work, and if the
bots just leave the link as is, final decisions are made by humans.
Anton
Andre Engels wrote:
On 7/9/05, Daniel Herding <DHerding(a)gmx.de>
wrote:
for Norwegian Bokmal, Wikipedia treats nb: and no:
interwiki links as
equivalent. But the wiki is found at
http://no.wikipedia.org .
Now someone from the Estonian Wikipedia noticed me that they prefer no:
over nb:. So what the bot is doing in its current state (changing no: to
nb:) would be exactly the wrong way.
What do you think about this issue?
It's difficult. I used to have the policy "nb: on nn: or if there is
also a nn: link", but that had problems because it tended to re-load
nb: in checking links and reported it as lacking even if it was not.
We could go back to it, but then would have to program it better.
Then again, no: has the advantage that the two versions come under
each other in languages where there's alphabetization on code. But I
don't think nn: would ever accept nb:.
I'm not sure what to do...
Andre Engels
_______________________________________________
Wikibots-l mailing list
Wikibots-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibots-l