User talk:Erus Iluvatar

From ArchWiki

Thank you

Thank you for your recent edit on Pipewire. I am new to ArchWiki and missed the correct formatting. Thanks for fixing it. Cheers! Darksaber (talk)

Don't worry, everyone has to start somewhere ;). If you want to read before future contributions, look at ArchWiki:Contributing#Resources. --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 13:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Minor edit mark

Thank you for your contributions to the wiki. Please mark your edits as minor when necessary, so readers can filter them with "non-minor edits" filter. Thank you. -- Thmeiov (talk) 12:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

You're right, I should be more careful on this. Thank you for reminding me ! --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 12:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits on the Virt-Manager page

Thanks for the recent edits you made im pretty new to ArchWiki/MediaWiki and suck formatting so thanks for fixing my bad formating ShinobuNarusaka (talk)

Hi ! Thank you for contributing a new page on a subject you're comfortable with. Don't worry, practice makes perfect. To double check your content before future contributions, look at ArchWiki:Contributing#Resources. --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 05:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

$include Readline question

Hi, thanks for your work. I've seen that you have added a space in Readline#History. `man bash` (and some blogs) have no space in "$include /etc/inputrc". Do you have any reference? --Marzal (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for pointing out my mistake: I had read the section too quickly and concluded this line was missing a space between the prompt and the command, but this is not the case. I've reverted my edit, sorry for the confusion. --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Related links redundancy

Hi, regarding [1], I have nothing against it specifically, in fact I support it, however in general justifying removing related links only because they exist somewhere else in the content may create a precedent that would affect a vast number of other articles. I don't recall specific style rules that explicitly forbid multiple links to the same article, although of course indeed there is such a thing as too many of them. In particular, personally I think that Related boxes should be allowed to highlight related articles regardless of whether they are already linked in the content.

I'm not sure if I can follow long discussions, however I'm just dropping this note here in case you have some ideas on how to clarify this issue in our style guides:

A very old related discussion: Help talk:Style#Related links

I'm also ok to leave this unregulated, I thought I'd just point out that there's nothing currently that disallows repeated internal links.

Feel free to move this discussion to Help talk:Style if you're interested in expanding on it :)

Cheers! -- Kynikos (talk) 18:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Woaw, thanks for the detailed response, I have already opened the discussion in Help talk:Laptop page guidelines#Related articles since I had not seen it was ongoing in Help talk:Laptop page guidelines#Using a "See also" section exclusively instead of a related articles box. My edit on MacBookPro11,x was in that vein: specifically on laptop pages, I have not found the Template:Related use in ways where it added to the page without being cumbersome. --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 19:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
And thank you for linking the discussions that I missed, I've added my response to Help talk:Laptop page guidelines#Related articles. -- Kynikos (talk) 06:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)