Wikipedia talk:Date formatting and linking poll/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Locke Cole (talk | contribs) →Proposal to add to WP:MOSNUM #2: response |
Arthur Rubin (talk | contribs) →Truth in advertising: truth |
||
Line 339:
::could someone who favours this proposal explain the rationale for linking years in such cases, please and thank you - is it to visually highlight them, or ... ? [[User:Sssoul|Sssoul]] ([[User talk:Sssoul|talk]]) 07:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
:::This was an alternate proposal, as a contrast to the date delinkers, who '''do''' treat years differently than other links. My reason is not "visual highlighting", but because (some) readers might be interested in finding out what else happened in that year, and it ''is'' appropriate for a "what links here" (and I don't mean micro-format considerations). I'm not saying all years should be linked. In most cases, a link from A to B is placed if people interested in A would be interested in the ''subject'' "B", not the "present" state of the article on "B".
:::I could ask the date delinkers the same thing about their proposal, but I don't expect a sensible answer. — [[User:Arthur Rubin|Arthur Rubin]] [[User talk:Arthur Rubin|(talk)]] 08:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
==Year links==
| |||