Talk:Lower Sorbian language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Endangered languages  
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Endangered languages, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles related to endangered languages. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Languages (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of standardized, informative and easy-to-use resources about languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Germany (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Sorbian Wikipedias[edit]

There is a bug report at Bugzilla requesting the creation of Wikipedias for Lower Sorbian (dsb:) and Upper Sorbian (hsb:). If anyone else is interested in seeing these Wikipedias created, please log on to Bugzilla and vote for the bug. User:Angr 10:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you - it has now been created, according to the List of Wikipedias. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

On not unnecessarily avoiding redirects[edit]

As WP:NOTBROKEN explains, there are plenty of concrete reasons not to write [[Upper Sorbian language|Upper Sorbian]] when Upper Sorbian is a redirect to Upper Sorbian language:

  1. It unnecessarily increases the size of the article.
  2. It makes the edit box harder to read.
  3. If Upper Sorbian language ever gets moved to Upper Sorbian (which might happen since that name isn't ambiguous), you'd just have to move it back again.
  4. None of the exceptions mentioned at WP:NOTBROKEN applies here, so there's no reason not to follow the guideline.
  5. Writing [[Upper Sorbian language|Upper Sorbian]] is utterly pointless and has absolutely no benefits.

In short, writing [[Upper Sorbian language|Upper Sorbian]] instead of simply [[Upper Sorbian]] makes this article worse. —Angr (talk) 23:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Let me give you my take on this:
  1. By a staggering 23 bytes!
  2. If one has trouble reading syntax this simple, then one should take a little time to familiarize oneself with it (that's what I did when I was new, now it doesn't make it harder to read for me), as there are plenty of cases where this and more complicated syntax has to present itself.
  3. If you think it should move, do it/request it, otherwise it's my time to "waste" (see below). Also, when I believe a link to a redirect could be a viable candidate for a separate article, I keep it for the reason listed at WP:NOTBROKEN.
  4. It doesn't say one should revert those who ignore it for some reason, see below.
  5. Well, the little "redirected from ..." box in the upper left has a tendency to distract me. And even the fact that the redirect's URL is shown by the browser has managed to bug me a few times (yes, really!). I know, these things must look like splitting hairs to you, but I have not seen any reason why your browsing/editing experience would really be worse off when bypassed. I once came across a case in which this was the case, and then I'm happy to accept it.
In short, for me it gets a little better, so if it doesn't make your experience worse off, what's wrong with keeping it? --JorisvS (talk) 14:36, 16 January 2011 (UTC)