User talk:Thomasmann: Difference between revisions

From BoyWiki
Line 16: Line 16:


Usually ''only the first instance'' of any important term includes a link to an article with more information. It is not necessary (nor customary) on wikis to create a link for ''every instance'' of the term in an article. You are welcome to do so, if you wish, but it is not really necessary at all, as the "See also" section can (and should) include the linked article as well. [[User:User4|User4]] ([[User talk:User4|talk]]) 22:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Usually ''only the first instance'' of any important term includes a link to an article with more information. It is not necessary (nor customary) on wikis to create a link for ''every instance'' of the term in an article. You are welcome to do so, if you wish, but it is not really necessary at all, as the "See also" section can (and should) include the linked article as well. [[User:User4|User4]] ([[User talk:User4|talk]]) 22:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
-------------------------------------------
Yeah I was wondering about that [[User:User4|User4]] . As I was doing it it seemed quite superfluous. Thanks again for all your help.

Revision as of 22:54, 30 April 2016

Welcome to BoyWiki! We hope you will contribute much and well. You will probably want to read the help pages. Again, welcome and have fun! Etenne 12:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


Thanks Etenne glad to be here! Thomasmann

Hi.

Welcome.

I left a message for you on the Encryption article talk page: https://www.boywiki.org/en/Talk:Encryption User4 (talk) 20:20, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

You may want to save yourself from some unnecessary work.

Usually only the first instance of any important term includes a link to an article with more information. It is not necessary (nor customary) on wikis to create a link for every instance of the term in an article. You are welcome to do so, if you wish, but it is not really necessary at all, as the "See also" section can (and should) include the linked article as well. User4 (talk) 22:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


Yeah I was wondering about that User4 . As I was doing it it seemed quite superfluous. Thanks again for all your help.