Talk:Fagin the Jew
| WikiProject Comics | (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] Untitled
I added a wikilink to 2003 for the book publishing, because I felt it was useful. 205.210.232.62 (talk · contribs) removed it, because he did not feel it was useful. Anyone else has an opinion? I like it, but would not want to get into an edit war with that user. Thanks MosheZadka 12:07, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- It is my view that links to years that are not part of full dates are almost never useful, and I routinely remove them. At Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Date formatting it says:
"If the date doesn't contain a day and a month, then date preferences won't work, and square brackets won't respond to your readers' auto-formatting preferences. So unless there is a special relevance of the date link, there's no need to link it. This is an important point: simple years, decades and centuries should only be linked if there's a strong reason for doing so. See Wikipedia:Make_only_links_relevant_to_the_context for the reasons that it's usually undesirable to insert low-value chronological links; see also Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Internal links."
- I agree with this position. That is why I removed the link. (By the way 205.210.232.62 is an IP address that I often wind up with when i am logged out by mistake.) If others here strongly feeel that the year link should remain, so be it. I also don't want to get into an edit war. DES (talk) 15:11, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] "Historical Revisionism?"
Why is this article linked to the article on historical revisionism? Oliver Twist fiction, not history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluemonkee (talk • contribs) 05:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
