User talk:Trig Jegman

Disclaimers and Notices
This page is intended for Nookipedia uses and purposes only. 'If you aren't here to tell me something directly wiki related, then do not leave anything below. I'm not interested in whatever it is that's not wiki related.' This could include personal information of any type, questions about non-wiki topics, or my external pursuits. To indicate that I have read a section, I will add a line under the header.

When creating a section, please use three equal signs.

This page will next be archived on December 1st, 2020 or at 50 sections, whichever comes first.

Welcome
18:30, December 13, 2019 (EST)

Renaming images
Hi there! I noticed that you renamed a few images - I just want to point out that there are some naming conventions that you can view at the Upload page or at the Project Images page. It might aid you if you were to rename other images! Thank you and have a good day. P aviinka (Message me!)  10:46, May 8, 2020 (EDT)

Deleting file redirects
If a long-standing file is moved, the resulting redirect should not be deleted just because no pages link to it. Page links aren't the only links to worry about - there are also external links, as well as links in page histories and edit summaries. Deleting file redirects provides no real benefit at best, and breaks links at worst, on top of eating up both staff and your own time. File redirects as a result of a move should only be deleted if the original file upload was recent, or the name is inappropriate. Let me know if you disagree on any of these points and we can discuss. ~ Super  Hamster  Talk 00:22, September 26, 2020 (EDT)
 * I cannot say I necessarily agree. It's extremely unlikely people are linking to specific files externally, and even on the rare occurance that there is, a summary in the deletion tab to the new file can be provided for the low chance that it occurs. Page histories and edit summaries break over time. Thats simply how change and improvement occurs, and so to articially bolster what the old page versions were like with a different name wouldn't be as authentic--showing a name was previously not up to standard is the same as a sentence being altered for not being up to standard. I can better manage the delete tags for the staff's sake, but it has no impact on my own personal time :)
 * At the end of the day, I would prefer to minimize the unused amount of pages and condense things to only contain the most updated versions of whatever is being discussed. To have a lot more than necessary (to me at least) causes more confusion. It would be easier to spot a page in 1 blue link and 4 red ones than 5 blue links, at the least. Some places may tolerate red links entirely, but there too are alternatives to merely having red links in historical discussions. As the community fountain may demonstrate, there are several ways to preserve file links without keeping a redirect on that page *solely* for that page. It does not make sense to say lets move files A to B without removing the function of files A in the first place. Trig - 12:10, September 26, 2020 (EDT)
 * External links to file pages isn't uncommon, I see it on social media and forums. I'm not keen on giving users the unfriendly experience of having to figure out the deletion log.
 * I'm not sure I see how a broken file makes page history more "authentic", and that's not really my concern here. If an editor is looking through page history, it's more useful for them to see files as they were than to have to individually look up each moved file to see what used to be there. This is not a common occurrence as you say, but it's an example of a downside of deleting file redirects.
 * My main point is: I don't see the benefit of deleting a file redirect. If there was a benefit to deleting redirects that outweighed the cons I mentioned, then great, let's delete 'em. But as I see it there is absolutely no benefit. What confusion is caused by file redirects existing? For your example, in most cases I'd rather see 5 blue links that lead to the proper destinations. To clarify, I'm not saying that links to images should not be updated - they should be. ~ Super  Hamster  Talk 03:07, September 27, 2020 (EDT)
 * To me, it just does not make sense to have a link that is almost guaranteed to not be used and to not just directly link to things instead. If there was some cirumstance where an image absolutely needed to be seen in an old revision, there are several easy ways I can think of remedying that issue--but I can't see why that would be an issue. I just feel as though they are disorganized. Trig - 12:29, September 29, 2020 (EDT)