Hey, about edits like  or  I'd like to remind you that we haven't discussed yet about replacing Template:Keypress with Template:Ic, although I wanted to do that indeed, since I support the deprecation of Keypress. Probably the best place to start such a discussion is in Help_talk:Style/Migration_to_new_Code_formatting_templates. -- Kynikos 12:30, 1 November 2011 (EDT) Update: discussion started at Help_talk:Style/Migration_to_new_Code_formatting_templates#Template:Keypress. -- Kynikos 13:33, 1 November 2011 (EDT)
- I just added some issues and suggestions I have with the current Template:Keypress on Help_talk:Style. I'm glad to see this being discussed! :) -- Jstjohn 15:57, 1 November 2011 (EDT)
Ahem... it's me again :) About  and  you should be aware of Help:Style#Blank_lines: please do not use multiple blank lines to space out sections, it just produces bad html code (an empty paragraph), while if you think sections need more white space above them, you should request to add more margin-top to <h#> tags on the bug tracker (possibly discussing that first). -- Kynikos 08:49, 2 November 2011 (EDT)
- I even checked Help:Editing before I added those extra blank lines too! I guess I should have checked Help:Style instead. :P To hopefully prevent others from making the same mistake I made, I added a link to Help:Style#Blank_lines on Help:Editing#Line_breaks. This is the diff of the edit I made.
- Would it better to have a discussion about adding more margin-top to <h#> on the forums or on Help_talk:Style? -- Jstjohn 00:32, 3 November 2011 (EDT)
- Help:Editing, Help:Template, Help:Reading and probably other articles now somewhat duplicate Help:Style in some parts, that's something that needs to be fixed.
- About heading margins, try to start a forum thread, it's more likely that web developers will find the discussion. Another solution to increase the visibility of headings may be giving a border-bottom also to h3, h4 and perhaps h5 and h6 ? I don't know...
- -- Kynikos 10:52, 3 November 2011 (EDT)
- Oh, I realize why I removed that now. I quickly clicked on the "Wikipedia" link which just goes to the Wikipedia main page, and I assumed it must've been broken. For some reason, I didn't see the second link. Oops! I just reverted it back to how it was before. Good catch! -- Jstjohn 03:00, 19 December 2011 (EST)
- Ah, no problem. For a moment there I thought the template might be deprecated in favor of some other style. Anyway, thanks for the revert! ~ Filam 09:43, 19 December 2011 (EST)
Hi, I've just undone one of your edits: 
Not having to move all the translations of a page when moving an English article is one of the advantages of interlanguage links over the old Template:i18n :)
- I think I made that edit so the "(Redirected from Gnome Package Guidelines)" text wouldn't appear. In other words, visiting that page from one of the related articles would send you directly there without needing the redirect. Am I not supposed to make a change like that?
- Or should I have also updated the capitalization on the Italian language page at the same time?
- -- Jstjohn (talk) 01:52, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hehe the problem is that it:GNOME Package Guidelines doesn't exist :) You renamed only the English article, but the Italian one was left to the previous name (in fact it's no longer required to move all the translations of an article at once).
- Maybe you wanted to edit Gnome Package Guidelines (Italiano) instead, updating the en:Gnome Package Guidelines interlanguage link to en:GNOME Package Guidelines.
- Interlanguage links are a new feature for everybody here (except users used to Wikipedia or other wikis), so it's normal that we have to learn how to use them correctly ;)
- -- Kynikos (talk) 10:16, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Come to think of it, is it possible that you were thinking that interlanguage links work so that for example it:GNOME Package Guidelines means "on the Italian article, use 'GNOME Package Guidelines' to link here"? Obviously that's not how they work (although it would be great :) ) it:GNOME Package Guidelines simply means "on this article, add a link to the Italian article 'GNOME Package Guidelines'".
- -- Kynikos (talk) 10:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, these links make sense now. What I was trying to fix before was the link that appears in the "Package creation guidelines" box on the English version of the page. I just figured out how that box is created, and my initial attempt at fixing it was way off target. I just went and fixed the template for it. :)
- -- Jstjohn (talk) 20:47, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Regarding , the fact that a redirect is not linked to (internally) is not generally enough to justify its deletion. Unless its title is completely meaningless, redirects:
- can also be used to make articles appear in search results for terms that don't contain their actual title (e.g. searching for "Apache" doesn't show LAMP among the title-matching results)
- are placeholders that help preventing the creation of duplicated articles
- can be used to spell a title with different capitalizations (e.g. to help searches)
- may be referenced from external sources
- may be used in the future to link to the target article if the wording fits a particular sentence better than the actual title
There may be more reasons to keep them, while deleting gives no advantages, as redirects don't pollute wiki statistics :)
- Ah, I forgot about their usefulness for searches and preventing duplicated articles. Sorry about that!
- -- Jstjohn (talk) 05:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)