Thread:Undoniel/@comment-3406131-20170302214506/@comment-3406131-20170303004655

Mrkermit wrote: When clicking Otto Gunther Octavius, I presume to find some info about that the name and not to be redirected to Doctor Octopus. That's pretty much why I re-propose the "portal/hub" way of handling the disambiguation: We click on "Otto Gunther Octavius", it lead you to Otto Octavius disambiguation, apart from other Doctor Octopuses.

Mrkermit wrote: That redirect is meant for searching purposes and it creates confusion at least for me. By our policies every real name should be a redirect to alias disambiguation. I'm all for breaking rules but not on a template level. Harry Osborn should redirect to Green Goblin and if we want to do it otherwise, it should be done by adding brackets manually. I don't like that policy about restricting disambiguation to aliases but even if we change that there's always going to redirects to the same page. And that should never happen. If some infobox has a helpful link, I don't understand why we should add a link elsewhere for consistency if it's not helpful there. I'm really unsure of where you going here (I have to admit I'm pretty tired so that might explain it), but for what I understood:
 * That would not be breaking policies and templates, but returning to the point least edits were needed, before Lua IIRC.
 * I don't see why Harry Osborn should lead to Green Goblin. Harry Osborn is a disambiguation on its own, and the Green Goblin is currently occupied by Norman Osborn (and I'm in favor of a Norman Osborn disambiguation instead of having it).
 * There's no proposal of restricting disambiguation to aliases, but to make major ones, for example War Machine, presenting War Machine, and linking to disambiguation pages such as James Rhodes (I've created examples on my user page). That way, when you click on a character named "James Rhodes", you actually go to the relevant disambiguation, and if you click on "War Machine", same thing happens.
 * We should not have to add links where they should (and where they did before the change) appear on their own.

Mrkermit wrote: Linking is meant to help a reader, not for creating consistent look.
 * Linking is meant to help a reader, yes, and that's why I am doing both propositions of the hub/portal policy and the return to names creating links, for the reader to be able to more easily navigate, without creating more useless work for the editor (work that wasn't necessary at some point before).
 * If it look better at the same time, that's a bonus. And consistent look can't be a bad thing.

Mrkermit wrote: We have to determine is a link to disambiguation helpful to a reader. If we decide that it is, we have to find a way to do it. It don't necessarily have to be infobox link. If many readers really benefit from that link, it should be made much more clearer. But if we decide that it doesn't deserve a hatnote or something like that, we still can't allow redirecting back to the same page. I agree that on Peter Parker (Earth-65) article, link to PP hub page would be good. But we shouldn't change a template before policies. Well, in fact, what I propose is what was applied before, and IIRC, it's just the update to Lua that changed it, without we changing it back afterwards.

There wouldn't be any loss of information, there would be less work for the editors... That's a win-win.

And as a reader of the wikia, I can tell you I used often those little links on real name field to navigate between character pages and disambiguation, and it bother me since they've disappeared (without that change being decided -still IIRC).

On the other hand, the redirect-to-the-same-page always bothered me a little, I have to admit it, but mainly because I didn't understood why people created those redirect when they weren't needed. But you're giving too much importance to that detail. Especially considering users do create those useless redirect and on some occasions add the brackets. In other words: The bad aspect of the situation is already present no matter what, but it shouldn't force us to not apply the improvements for other pages (and it would be required if we choose the "hub/portal" solution).

Mrkermit wrote: I also disagree with your position on redundant links. Those are not as bad as redirects to the same page but still a distract to a reader. They're not a distraction. No one ever complained before as far as I know (as I said, that was that way before and it worked fine). At much, they prevent the user from having to go back to the top of the page, and that's it.

I'm sorry, but this is again a simple proposal that's already taking too much time, so I'm gonna sum up before going to sleep:
 * On the redirect-on-the-same-page vs. real name creating a link: The slightly bad effect you're mentioning is already present AND you're exaggerating its impact. The slightly good effect I wish to have back would not bring much more bad effect, would create a little more consistency on the appearance of the pages and would make navigation a little simpler/more fluid.
 * On having the current alias field, the redundancy and distraction impacts are close to none, because there a large gap separating title from current alias. Having a link appear would create a little more consistency on the appearance of the pages and would make navigation slightly more fluid.
 * (Given the number of mentions I've made of it, I hope my memory isn't lying to me right now, but -still IIRC-:) The current situation wasn't a choice but the result of an update of the code by Wikia, and we haven't changed it back since mostly because we didn't.

So, to sum up, the proposal would be:
 * Return to the pre-Lua (I'm still unsure it was at that time but I don't see when it could be if not that period):
 * Automatic links for real name and current alias field if the page exist
 * The "Main aliases" disambiguation pages becoming "hub/portals" for the identity with the individuals' alternates/others/etc listed on their own disambiguation.

AnnabellRice, was what I made with War Machine and James Rhodes what you're referring for the hubs, or was it another model (I don't recall what were the options discussed at the time, but I think to recall this one was the simpler to have without creating new codes).