On the "What links here" special pages, links from
article pages to user pages should be ignored. These
links are usually just people tracing their own efforts and
are not useful, obscuring orphans.
I suspect that nobody meant "from user pages to article pages".
I object; I want to see this information.
However, I don't object to making it a user option, nor to listing links
from outside [[:]] under a separate heading.
If it's a user option, however, I'd prefer that the default be to list them,
to avoid overzealous voters for deletion.
(Following a link back to a user page may lead to an indication that
somebody is planning to do something with the page, although
admittedly that info *should* be on the [[Talk:]] page.)
So a separate heading may be best, as long as (for Nobody's sake) one
can tell at a glance that the article is an orphan as far as [[:]] is
concerned.
As for knowing whether articles are orphaned, there's also the matter
of the automatically generated orphan list; the behaviour here need not
match the behaviour in "What links here".
I can see arguments both ways but have no clear preference myself.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I assumed he meant the other way as well. I'm with Toby, I
think the "what links here" should be complete. But I am
open to the idea that we need some way to find pages whose
only links are from user pages--presumably that makes them
orphans, in a sense. Unfortunately, the database schema
doesn't make that easy.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Logged In: YES
user_id=573955
I suspect that nobody meant "from user pages to article pages".
I object; I want to see this information.
However, I don't object to making it a user option, nor to listing links
from outside [[:]] under a separate heading.
If it's a user option, however, I'd prefer that the default be to list them,
to avoid overzealous voters for deletion.
(Following a link back to a user page may lead to an indication that
somebody is planning to do something with the page, although
admittedly that info *should* be on the [[Talk:]] page.)
So a separate heading may be best, as long as (for Nobody's sake) one
can tell at a glance that the article is an orphan as far as [[:]] is
concerned.
As for knowing whether articles are orphaned, there's also the matter
of the automatically generated orphan list; the behaviour here need not
match the behaviour in "What links here".
I can see arguments both ways but have no clear preference myself.
Logged In: YES
user_id=3076
I assumed he meant the other way as well. I'm with Toby, I
think the "what links here" should be complete. But I am
open to the idea that we need some way to find pages whose
only links are from user pages--presumably that makes them
orphans, in a sense. Unfortunately, the database schema
doesn't make that easy.
Logged In: YES
user_id=558755
Eh, sorry, my feature request at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=588072&group_id=34373&atid=411195 is about this same thing--an article I created which is effectively an orphan but doesn't appear to be. I wouldn't have filed that if I'd noticed you talking about it here too.
Logged In: YES
user_id=446709
Reducing priority. I don't think anyone _really_ wants these
omitted from 'what links here', but others have requested it
for the orphans page.