Closing RFDs

Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Rua
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ok, done. Keep in mind, though, that there is no problem with having red links in entries, they're obviously all over the place. So there is no urgent need to remove such links. Of course, there is the principle that if an entry should not/never exist, links to it shouldn't either, but we don't have a concerted effort to remove invalid links all over Wiktionary yet. Maybe something we should get started sometime?

Rua (mew)21:28, 16 April 2019

Most red links go point to pages that should exist. It's worth the effort to remove those that don't. As for a concerted effort, I'd support it, but it sounds challenging given all the kinds of entries that shouldn't exist (failed RFD/RFV should be findable, but most such links point to entries that were never created).

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds21:32, 16 April 2019

It is probably very hard to do in general for all languages, but it may be easier to do for something like Proto-Indo-European. I've noticed a lot of entries linking to PIE reconstructions that are obvious rubbish/outdated. It may also be easier to weed out incorrect links to English, given that our coverage of English is huge and not a lot of red links will be left. Though I may be wrong on that.

Rua (mew)21:36, 16 April 2019

I appreciate you closing all those RFDs, but once again, you are forgetting to check whether there are links to the Latin reconstructions that ought to be dealt with, e.g. Special:WhatLinksHere/Reconstruction:Latin/circlus. Can you please deal with those, and check the other ones as well?

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds05:06, 1 May 2019

I did check and fix links, I must have missed that particular one.

Rua (mew)10:02, 1 May 2019