Forum:Tweaking the update page policy
In Forum:Update page policy, a rule which forbid wiki links in update pages was passed. I'd like to undo that rule. That rule doesn't help anything, and is a burden on visitors.
I was just reading the Main Page, and was interested in the Halloween event. I clicked the "Read more" link in the news post, and was led to the Update page. After I read the update, I wanted to see the wiki's article on the event. What links did I find? Only those to Jagex's Game Guide. If you've ever read it, you'll know how unhelpful Jagex's game guide is. What are our readers interested in? The wiki's detailed, step by step guide or Jagex's vague Game guide page? I'm more interested in our article, and I'm sure most readers are interested in that also. They don't want (or may not know how to) perform a search to get to the intended article.
A reason that the change was implemented was to keep our update pages exactly the same way as Jagex's update pages, but I think it's good to exercise some individuality, especially when doing so significantly hinders our ability to disseminate information.
I should note that most update pages were made with internal links before that thread passed a week ago, so this should be nothing new to those who frequent the update namespace.
Support - Per nom. I liked those links. Suppa chuppa 02:31, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
Question - Will links that are on the original news post remain ("sling" went to the kbase)?03:10, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
Support - (That previous thread passed with mostly comments...) As long as original links stay as they were in the Jagex update, I support for additional inter-wiki links within the update namespace. Ryan PM 03:34, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
Strong support - That thread passed?! It is very beneficial for viewers to be able to quickly click on a link to an article about something they want to know more about. 222 talk 05:34, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
Conditional support - Per Ryan.17:34, October 19, 2010 (UTC)
Support Yup okay. So like we could have a section at the end which could be called "See also" and we could have links to pages for the content that was released with that update. Matt (t) 05:03, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
Support - How did this actually get removed in the first place? a wiki is a site with many links to other places for if you wanna know more... JOEYTJE50TALK pull my finger 21:43, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
Notice of intent - I'm going to close this soon unless anyone objects. I want to get it updated before Monday so that any future updates have the links already in them. --LiquidTalk 15:55, October 23, 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Having a in-text link is easier. Think, "Oh look, I want to know what a cow is, I'll just click the link" is easier than "Hmm, what's a cow? No! How can I find it?!" and they miss the See also section below, or just forget they wanted to look up "Cow". 222 talk 05:27, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - There would be a lot of fuzzy area of what to include and what not to include under this kind of section. Links are fine.08:08, October 22, 2010 (UTC)