Forum:CT:Manual of Style Linking tweaks

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Manual of Style Linking tweaks
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was Support proposal. Imperators II(Talk) 12:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I would like to point out the Linking section of the Manual of Style, the General rules subsection of which currently says this:

A subject should be linked once upon its first mention in
  • The article infobox
  • The article introduction
  • The article body
  • A table in the article body
  • Individual references

Item 3, "the article body", quickly leads to some potentially rather awkward situations. Behold Rucklin's hangar#Description. Technically the Manual of Style would call for the "Rucklin's hangar" in the very first sentence of Description to link to hangar (and arguably to Jace Rucklin, as well). (It must be noted that the Linking section's Formatting subsection specifically allows for such linking to be done generally: "However, individual parts of compound terms may be linked upon subsequent mentions (example: YT-1300 light freighter is appropriate if YT-1300 light freighter has been linked previously).")

The way I see it, doing that for the very first mention (not counting the introduction) of an article's subject is aesthetically non-pleasing and counterproductive. It'd be bad enough on the Rucklin's hangar article, and it'd be even worse in articles on subjects that have alternate names, i.e., "A, also known as B[, C, and D], was ..." which in turn could all potentially be linked.

To that end, I would like to propose that we add another bullet point under General rules' "However, do not include links in" item, saying "The first instance(s) of an article subject's name(s) in the article body".



While we're on the subject of amending the MoS as far as it concerns linking practices, there are a few more small issues in there I'd like to see changed. (They're small enough that I'm hoping we can do them all in a single vote.)

First off, the General rules subsection currently says this:

However, do not include links in
  • The bolded part of the introduction
  • Section headings
  • Dialogue in quote templates

The first bullet point uses terminology that excludes Comprehensive-length articles that frequently don't have an "introduction", and thus may lead to potential confusion. I suggest we change it to the more precise "The bolded mention(s) of the name(s) of an article's subject at the beginning of the article's text". In addition, the Subject name subsection of the Emphasis section should instead read:

"The name of the article should be bolded in its first usage in the article's text, as should any alternate formal names and nicknames mentioned in the article's text (or in its introduction, if present)."

Secondly, there's this:

"Articles within a specific continuity should only link to other articles within that continuity, with the only exception being the article's "Behind the scenes" section (example: Yoda should not link to Yoda's species/Legends)."

That passage technically fails to mention two other exceptions where we may link to other continuities' articles:

  1. The kinda obvious one where we manually link to a Canon or Legends counterpart in the {{Top}} template via the |canon= and |legends= parameters in cases where the article titles differ by more than just a /Legends suffix.
  2. Disambiguation templates, such as on the Canon article Rill, which points to the unrelated Legends Rill (species) and Rill (bounty hunter) articles.

To that end, I'd like to propose that we note those additional exceptions in the abovementioned passage, like this:

"Articles within a specific continuity should only link to other articles within that continuity (example: Yoda should not link to Yoda's species/Legends). The only exceptions to this are:

Vote 1: Exempt the first mention(s) of article subject's name(s) in the body from being linked

Support

  1. As nominator. Imperators II(Talk) 17:56, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  2. Nicely done. OOM 224 (he/him) 18:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  3. —spookywillowwtalk 18:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  4. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 18:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  5. —SnowedLightning (they/them) 19:17, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  6. 01miki10 Open comlink 20:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  7. Herasoars(comms) 21:30, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  8. JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 05:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  9. Lewisr (talk) 05:04, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  10. Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 08:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  11. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 16:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
  12. Dentface (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

Vote 2: Rephrasing to include shorter articles and codifying more locations for cross-continuity links

Support

  1. As nominator. Imperators II(Talk) 17:56, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  2. OOM 224 (he/him) 18:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  3. —spookywillowwtalk 18:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  4. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 18:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  5. —SnowedLightning (they/them) 19:17, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  6. 01miki10 Open comlink 20:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  7. Herasoars(comms) 21:30, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  8. JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 05:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  9. Lewisr (talk) 05:04, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  10. Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 08:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  11. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 16:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
  12. Dentface (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss