AquaticDatabase:Proposals, rejected

From AquaticDatabase

This page is an archive for proposals that have been rejected. If you are considering a new proposal for AquaticDatabase, it may be useful to browse these proposals and understand why they were rejected.

[edit] Auto Redirects VS Manual Redirects

[edit] Proposal

I propose the following guideline for AquaticDatabases:

All pages with no content except a sentence directing the reader to another page should use an automatic redirect instead of a manual link. For example, an automatic redirect should be used inplace of a single sentence or thought such as:

"_______ is another name for _______."

"_______ is the common name for _______."

"_______ is an acronym for _______."

"See also _______."

--Jared Wood 21:59, 6 June 2006 (EDT)

[edit] Discussion

The argument for using pages such as "_______ is the common name for _______." has to do with search engines. Search engines rank a page based on a number of different criteria. If a search engine is ranking pages for the key words Magnificent Sea Anemone, then a page with the title Magnificent Sea Anemone will almost always outrank a page without the keyword in the title. By maintaining pages that only redirect the reader to a new page will help the database to receive an increased number of hits from search engines. On the flip side I understand it is convenient for the reader to not have to click the link to go to the actual content page. --JakePehrson 12:25, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

Hmmmmm. That is a good point. My counter point is the same that you've already given about ease of browsing. I was also thinking that the Special Pages lists (like Special:shortpages) get clogged up with all the minor entries and become useless. I'll have to think about it some more and see if I can come up with an iron clad reason for my preference. --Jared Wood 13:53, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

I've been thinking and I have another concession. Right now when I look at Category:Freshwater Fish I see all scientific names (and consequently have no idea what to click on). If we keep the Common Name pages separate like they are now, we can put them into such Categories as Category:Freshwater Fish (common names) and Category:Saltwater Fish (common names). I think that would greatly benefit different kinds of users. --Jared Wood 18:35, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

ok, I am convinced. Can I start Categorizing common name articles as described above? --Jared Wood 19:34, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

I agree with the above, go ahead with the above categories. One more argument (if necessary) for using "_______ is the common name for _______." is many common names will be associated with more then one scientific name. For example Blue Tang, Skunk Clown, etc. --JakePehrson 20:09, 7 June 2006 (EDT)