Wikipedia talk:Template index/Redirect pages

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Template index/Redirect pages page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

Redirect

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Redirect, a collaborative effort to improve the standard of redirects and their categorization 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.
Note: This banner should be placed on the talk pages of project, template and category pages that exist and operate to maintain redirects.
This banner is not designed to be placed on the talk pages of most redirects and almost never on the talk pages of mainspace redirects. For more information see the template documentation.RedirectWikipedia:WikiProject RedirectTemplate:WikiProject Redirectredirect

Templates

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Templates, a group dedicated to improving the maintenance of Wikipedia's templates. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TemplatesWikipedia:WikiProject TemplatesTemplate:WikiProject TemplatesTemplates

Ligatures

There's something weird going on between Wikipedia:Template index/Redirect pages and {{R from ligature}}/{{R to ligature}}. The former gives ß as a ligature that should be under {{R from ASCII-only}} when it's used to substitute for SS, while it gives {{R to ligature}} when a B is used to substitute for it, but the ligature template pages make no such distinction and seem to imply that they should be used any time an ß is involved. I'm left confused as to what redirects including the ß should cover – the template index seems to imply that the ligature template is for characters that look similar, which I don't think is accurate, but I don't know for certain. I would think some more clarification is needed, or an updating of the examples in some fashion; I'd do it myself, but I don't know what these templates' intended (and actual) use-cases are. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rm incorrect example of {R to user namespace}

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The example given for {{R to user namespace}} of

User:SuperEditor → User:Tricky Ed

is incorrect if the rule on no intra-user namespace redirects is true. Tule-hog (talk) 21:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed users have userpage redirects. As do misspelled user names. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 02:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I didn't mean 'no intra-user namespace redirects' in general; only for {{R to user namespace}}. From this redirect page must be outside the user namespace.Tule-hog (talk) 02:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of the rule for {{R to user namespace}}, as well as the cases you have mentioned, is the motivation for my request elsewhere. Tule-hog (talk) 03:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An alternative proposal would be to strike the rule, but I imagine it's there for a good reason. Tule-hog (talk) 03:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for inclusion in the "List of redirects by function"

It seems that all redirect categories are included in the Alphanumeric listing, while only some are listed in the functional index and the navbox. What are the criteria for inclusion in the latter? Why would they not all be included? By default, the navbox is where I go to look for redirect categories, and I assumed that it contained them all. I didn't even realize that the alphanumeric list existed until I stumbled upon it just now. For example, why should Template:R from DOI prefix not appear in the navbox? Set theorist (talk) 18:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Set theorist: many years ago the functional index navbar was very small and depicted only the most commonly used rcat templates. The alphanumeric listing has always been meant to hold all existing rcat templates, and at one time it did. Over time other editors added more and more rcat templates to the functional index and created some new ones that should have been added at least to the alphanumeric index, but that didn't always happen. And now it has become a questionable state as seen by your inquiry. The more that is added to the navbar, it seems the more unwieldy it gets, but it still appears to be helpful for some even now. So "functional" originally meant "most commonly used". P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 02:59, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]