Talk:Glossary: Difference between revisions

From BoyWiki
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
::You've got it backwards, I think. The ''LINKS'' are redundant, and should be removed '''''if they lead to the exact same text as that from the FAQ glossary.''''' Don't you see that? [[User:User4|User4]] ([[User talk:User4|talk]]) 01:07, 9 April 2014 (CEST)
::You've got it backwards, I think. The ''LINKS'' are redundant, and should be removed '''''if they lead to the exact same text as that from the FAQ glossary.''''' Don't you see that? [[User:User4|User4]] ([[User talk:User4|talk]]) 01:07, 9 April 2014 (CEST)


::: No I don't think that... the links are the whole point of wiki. However, if you wanted to improve the text that the links lead too, that would be cool.
::: No I don't think that... the links are the whole point of wiki. However, if you wanted to improve the text that the links lead too, that would be cool.--[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] ([[User talk:Etenne|talk]]) 01:21, 9 April 2014 (CEST)

Revision as of 23:21, 8 April 2014

That is redundant.... add the short definitions next to the link. --Etenne (talk) 00:46, 9 April 2014 (CEST)

You've got it backwards, I think. The LINKS are redundant, and should be removed if they lead to the exact same text as that from the FAQ glossary. Don't you see that? User4 (talk) 01:07, 9 April 2014 (CEST)
No I don't think that... the links are the whole point of wiki. However, if you wanted to improve the text that the links lead too, that would be cool.--Etenne (talk) 01:21, 9 April 2014 (CEST)