Commons talk:Only use category redirects where necessary
Rework: new section
← Older revision
Revision as of 10:10, 26 March 2013
Line 141:
Line 141:
::If you, I, or anyone else is actually going to work on this - for instance to try and action the hard redirect in [[#A solution]] - then {{tl|proposed}} would be an appropriate tag.
::If you, I, or anyone else is actually going to work on this - for instance to try and action the hard redirect in [[#A solution]] - then {{tl|proposed}} would be an appropriate tag.
::I agree category redirects have their problems, but there is no consensus for this as a guideline, and in its present form there never will be. Noone can seriously say a page that starts "Things are changing. Parts of this may no longer be relevant." is the ideal form of that page.--[[User:Nilfanion|Nilfanion]] ([[User talk:Nilfanion|talk]]) 09:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
::I agree category redirects have their problems, but there is no consensus for this as a guideline, and in its present form there never will be. Noone can seriously say a page that starts "Things are changing. Parts of this may no longer be relevant." is the ideal form of that page.--[[User:Nilfanion|Nilfanion]] ([[User talk:Nilfanion|talk]]) 09:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
+
+
== Rework ==
+
+
What's missing from the page is practical advice on when, exactly, category redirects are OK, when they are not, and where the grey areas are. I'd suggest following basic structure:
+
+
#Why we can't use hard redirects
+
#Why soft redirects are useful
+
#Why soft redirects aren't perfect
+
#Appropriate usage
+
#Inappropriate usage
+
+
Because cat redirects are not perfect, the list of appropriate tasks is going to be shorter than that for normal redirects on a Wikipedia. For instance, there's no need for redirects from plausible mis-spellings. I'd be tempted to add a section on when to delete redirects too (never if useful).--[[User:Nilfanion|Nilfanion]] ([[User talk:Nilfanion|talk]]) 10:10, 26 March 2013 (UTC)