I should also point out that the likelihood of any links pointing to either of the other two extensions is very low, considering neither have README files (both had their code on the page) and only the GitHub extension even had the extension page URL in the extension description.
*--* *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015 Major in Computer Science www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo@gmail.com
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:25 AM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Matthew Flaschen wrote:
On 02/07/2013 03:14 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
Sure, I picked "Gists". It didn't seem like a very difficult choice. All cleaned up (redirected) now.
I don't think that makes sense. If someone has a link to http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Gist from a README or something, they're now going to a different extension.
You can propose deleting the others, but I think the redirects are somewhat misleading.
The confusion caused by having three almost identical extensions (particularly "Gist" v. "Gists") far exceeds the confusion caused by the redirects (or broken links, if we deleted the documentation, as you suggest). Even if we deleted the other extensions, both "Extension:Gist" and "Extension:GitHub" are completely reasonable and warranted redirects to "Extension:Gists", putting us exactly back to where we started.
I've re-reverted your edits and added a note to the page explaining that the other extensions were redirected/merged.
MZMcBride
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l