From Adventure Game Studio | Wiki
< User talk:Gilbert
Revision as of 01:54, 5 May 2007 by Dasjoe (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Hey, what's the deal with moving all pages to Capitalize Every Single Word? It seems more appropriate to use sentence case when dealing with normal terms (as opposed to proper nouns, which should of course be capitalized). Radiant (ATOTK) 15:28, 8 December 2005 (CET)


  1. It's not really necessary to change them if they're capitalized, moreover, you didn't change all the pages, so for example in the BFAQ half of them fixed, and the other half not, which creates even more inconsistensies, moreover, there're already pages linking to them.
  2. Moving (renaming) a page leaves lots of crap redirect pages, which is a pain to clean them off (and sometimes when you remove one redirect page some link may be broken).

-- Gilbot 02:19, 9 December 2005 (CET)

  • Isn't that the whole point of redirects, that you can redirect some title to Some Title or vice versa, so that people won't mess up links if they don't know how exactly to spell them? I think on Wikipedia about 40% of the pages are redirects now. Radiant (ATOTK) 02:42, 9 December 2005 (CET)

But still, there's no point to mess with the capitalizations, especially when they're article titles. -- Gilbot 02:43, 9 December 2005 (CET)

  • Proper grammar is important. Radiant (ATOTK) 12:25, 9 December 2005 (CET)

That's not with proper grammar, as they're titles, I don't think it's worth wasting time in such minor matters. -- Gilbot 12:26, 9 December 2005 (CET)

  • Wait, let me get this straight... you consider fixing minor mistakes a waste of time, so if other people spend some time fixing minor mistakes you will actually undo their work and put back the mistake? Radiant (ATOTK) 13:00, 9 December 2005 (CET)

Because they're not even mistakes, please calm down. -- Gilbot 13:02, 9 December 2005 (CET)

Sorry, Gil, but I agree with Radiant. Its silly to delete Redirect pages unless there is actually a difference in meaning between the pages. --SSH 14:52, 9 December 2005 (CET)

The problem did not come from redirect pages, it's just because he changed the caps in the titles of articles, which made the original pages to be redirect pages, what I did was just restoring these pages to their original (identical and capitalized) titles and delete those redirect pages left which weren't linked to by any other articles. -- Gilbot 03:33, 10 December 2005 (CET)

  • I don't really have a more tactful way of putting this, but you're rather obviously new to wiki editing, and I'm not. This is precisely what redirects are for. If people create an article with an improperly spelled or improperly capitalized title, then the wiki can be improved by fixing that mistake. If there happened to be links to the original, the redirect will fix it without anybody noticing. They click on the (also improperly spelled or capitalized) link and end up at the proper page.
  • For instance, when I renamed "Lens Flare", I fixed the (single) link going there because that link was also miscapitalized. When you undid my rename, you didn't fix it so you actually broke the (now properly spelled) link, forcing someone else to change it back to an improperly spelled link to make it work again. The problem is in you deleting useful redirects (and in you reverting other people's work for no good reason), not in any use of the move function. This is, frankly, not very useful.
  • Radiant (ATOTK) 12:42, 10 December 2005 (CET)

Sorry, but there's nothing against you, like I wrote before there's nothing wrong with capitalisations, so we don't really need to change their names when they're not even wrong, so these changes are not necessary. -- Gilbot

Sorry, Gilbert, but you're arguments dont hold up and the more this discussion goes on, the more I agree with Radiant. It is good to establish a proper capitalisation policy so that one can work out what the title of a page should be from scratch. There are lots of unlinked stuff in the wiki already, so that is no reason for deleting things. Radiant has more experience than you in this: I suggest you let it drop! --SSH 15:30, 11 December 2005 (CET)

Please, don't argue on such a minor matter, like I wrote before, I have no problem with redirects, but if there're no mistakes in the original article name, there's no point to move it just to change the cases of it if it doesn't make things better (It's okay to change the cases if the original was really in improper capitalizations), giving alternate titles to articles (using redirects), however, is encouraged, given that the alternative names are sensible for naming the articles, and they helps in searching and/or referencing. -- Gilbot 02:12, 12 December 2005 (CET)

I had let this drop, but I just found out that Gilbert's attitude to Radiant has made Radiant stop doing anything on the wiki at all. I think we lost a valuable contributor here. Surely if there's no point in moving something, there is also NO POINT MOVING IT BACK. Please, don't be an ass ons uch a minor matter. --SSH 17:14, 13 January 2006 (GMT)

I think the inactivity of Radiant is not related to anything, since after the hype in creating stuff during the first weeks of launch of this Wiki, changes are slow on the whole now, and I don't have an attitude towards Radiant, really, he did make many valuable contributions here. I just have problem with changing stuff that are unnecessary, and there're points to change them back to tidy up the site as a whole, as long as it's still possible. The AGS Wiki, in comparison to the Wikipedia, is tiny, so constant managements help keeping the information accessible and the site in shape, before it's expanded to a state that it's impossible to manage anymore (like in Wikipedia, in practice no redirects should be removed because the site is now so complex that doing such changes can break A LOT of stuff). -- Gilbot 02:40, 14 January 2006 (GMT)