On 11-04-04 08:12 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Happy-melonhappy-melon@live.com wrote:
If people think it would be better as a special page we'd make http://foo.example.com/w/index.php?title=Bar&action=edit a hard redirect to Special:Edit/Bar; that has the significant advantage of being able to be formed as an internal link.
I've always thought this was the best way to do things. Be careful about overusing short URLs, though -- the only reason robots don't spider /w/index.php?title=Foo&action=edit right now is because it starts with /w/ instead of /wiki/.
I can't think of a reason that any of the Special namespace needs to be indexed. Most of it is already marked noindex in the meta tags, as far as I remember. Additional explicit exclusion in a robots.txt file is always a good idea, though. Some auto-generation of a robots.txt file might be nice (WordPress does this). It's easy enough to exclude based on the prefix "Special:", but it's the localizations that ruin everything.
MZMcBride
I don't really think that's a good reason to preclude being able to create special page based content. Eg: A forum extension that uses special pages. Our own Special:Code, etc... if we chose to allow those to be indexed.
Side note, why don't we allow indexing of Allpages? That sounds like a sane way for Google to find all the pages on a small growing wiki that hasn't setup the best linking yet or generated an xml sitemap.
What "IS" so evil about actions? Besides the implementation details which are just that... something we can make better. In fact something we could potentially make work better than SpecialPages would in this context. Personally, I like tacking on ?action=edit and especially purge. Prefixing Special:Edit/ doesn't sound nice to me. I know I fixed the issues with things like Special:Movepage not sharing the same UI tabs as the rest of the actions.
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]