Simetrical wrote:
The most interesting revelation of the above tests, for those who missed it, is that it *is* possible to link to a page named after a URL, but [[http://foo.com]] won't do it (that generates a, what was
Any reason that we explicitly ban pages from having titles that look like URLs?
I was not involved in devloping the program, so I can not say whay this choose was take, but I can think at least to good reasons why such ban my be an interesting thing:
1) avoid advertisment vandalism (it is not difficult to imagine that if such name where allowed, many web site would want an article with the name of tehir URL - well actually they may stil want an article with the name of thei web site of with the name of their URL with the beginning http:// stripped)
2) Since [http://www.example.com] is a standard way of inserting an external link, a person who is to much used to insert internal link as [[Foo]], may easely wrongly try to insert an external link as [[http://www.example.com]]. If link and page name like this were allowed, the wiki will be full of such sort of links and pages.
AnyFile
On 8/19/06, Any File anysomefile@gmail.com wrote:
- avoid advertisment vandalism (it is not difficult to imagine that
if such name where allowed, many web site would want an article with the name of tehir URL - well actually they may stil want an article with the name of thei web site of with the name of their URL with the beginning http:// stripped)
We have plenty of articles about websites. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3APrefixindex&from=www... might give you some idea.
We're also pretty good at dealing with advertising...
- Since [http://www.example.com] is a standard way of inserting an
external link, a person who is to much used to insert internal link as [[Foo]], may easely wrongly try to insert an external link as [[http://www.example.com]]. If link and page name like this were allowed, the wiki will be full of such sort of links and pages.
Well, it's the difference between [[http://www.example.com]] showing up as a redlink, or showing up as an external link with an extra pair of square brackets, like this: [[1]] (where the [1] is the link). They'd probably be more likely to notice and fix the red link...
(I'm not arguing for or against allowing pages to be named http://whatever...)
Steve
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org