Difference between revisions of "Talk:@doom txt"
From DoomWiki.org
(Created page with "==Should be moved?== Seems "@" is a perfectly valid character for MediaWiki articles minus user names, actually, so this could have been created at @doom_txt. --~~~~") |
m (Quasar moved page Talk:Doom txt to Talk:@doom txt: Technologically correct title) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Should be moved?== | ==Should be moved?== | ||
Seems "@" is a perfectly valid character for MediaWiki articles minus user names, actually, so this could have been created at @doom_txt. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 16:11, 5 September 2017 (CDT) | Seems "@" is a perfectly valid character for MediaWiki articles minus user names, actually, so this could have been created at @doom_txt. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 16:11, 5 September 2017 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : If that's true, then I vote for this article to be moved to @doom_txt. --[[User:Voros|Voros]] ([[User talk:Voros|talk]]) 22:15, 6 September 2017 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Gee, {{wp|Wikipedia:Article titles#Special characters|I didn't know that!}} This seems completely uncontroversial. While it is refreshing to hear anyone acknowledge that new viewpoints can surface in talk threads (implied by the IRC conversation, i.e. power users' opinions are usually no surprise), our logs clearly show most moves occurring proactively. [[Special:Diff/64464/105751|Here]], for example, even though it had been contested in the past. Or [[Special:Diff/63409/139053|here]], which was no doubt far more disruptive than moving this page, due to the number of crawls and inbound external links it had experienced during its tenure. [[User talk:Ryan W|Ryan W]] ''([[User:Ryan W|living fossil]])'' 00:16, 7 September 2017 (CDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 00:35, 7 September 2017
Should be moved?[edit]
Seems "@" is a perfectly valid character for MediaWiki articles minus user names, actually, so this could have been created at @doom_txt. --Quasar (talk) 16:11, 5 September 2017 (CDT)
- If that's true, then I vote for this article to be moved to @doom_txt. --Voros (talk) 22:15, 6 September 2017 (CDT)
- Gee, I didn't know that! This seems completely uncontroversial. While it is refreshing to hear anyone acknowledge that new viewpoints can surface in talk threads (implied by the IRC conversation, i.e. power users' opinions are usually no surprise), our logs clearly show most moves occurring proactively. Here, for example, even though it had been contested in the past. Or here, which was no doubt far more disruptive than moving this page, due to the number of crawls and inbound external links it had experienced during its tenure. Ryan W (living fossil) 00:16, 7 September 2017 (CDT)
