Circular Links

A large number of pages here at TV Tropes have links to the page that contains the link. In other words, a link that doesn't go anywhere. I'm not certain how this practice started, but it's very poor style: links are intended for navigation, and this is what Web users expect them to do. Circular links confuse readers and waste their time.

I think this happens largely when people want to use the name of the page in the page (which is reasonable) and make it a Wiki Word out of habit. I try to avoid doing it myself, but don't generally bother changing it when I see it. It's fairly harmless, in my eyes.

Yeah, it's a habit, not a particularly damaging one though.

I always eliminate circular links when possible. Especially annoying is a circular potholed link. You click on it, thinking it's to some other page, and wind up in the same place you started from.

Circular links to a page's redirects are also fun.

I find it works for a Title Drop. Anyway, we have a thread for discussing this.

I lol'd.

I wasn't expecting that, nice.

Ha!

Hem. Yes, anyway, I find it useful for just getting the name to stick in your head. You see it as a title then you see it Wiki Word style and it helps reinforce it. It's not like it's a trap. You're not going to be on the page and going "Duh...what does that link to", surely?  ^*

And then there are various sorts of names which benefit from title drops. You might want to use your pun or you might want to help emphasis what particular part of the scenario is the trope, you might want to put the laconic version in the third paragraph and want a "Definition here, guys!" signal.

Making them blue and CamelCase makes them stick out and it adds to that philosophical point of the titles being handles or portals for further information and they are a little bit of our culture. I'm sure in You Know You Read Too Much TV Tropes When there is one about trying to verbally speak WikiWords and capitalisation and potholes.

Nice try...

I agree with you.

I often see it potholed or linked to in example sections, and often the impression is that the person forgot that the page they were linking to was the page they were adding an example to. Very annoying.

As a pothole it bothers me, I go "ooh what's this pothole leading to— oh, it's the same page I'm already on" and feel cheated out of another tab to open >.>

I think that Trope Names should always be links, just to reinforce the name among the readers.

Work titles don't need to be links on their own pages, but I think it's mostly added that way out of habit.

Regardless I agree with the sentiment that these don't really do any harm.

edited 9th Feb '11 8:11:43 AM by Meeble

See I'd much rather have work titles be links than the trope whose page I'm on. That's USEFUL - I've found many works by reading trope pages, being intreagued by the write-up, and clicking through to the work.

I may not have been clear, I meant that work titles don't need to be links on their own pages (such as: You don't need to Wiki Word Farscape on the Farscape page.)

Oh, that, I agree.

Fun fact: This week has been kicking my ass, re-reading what you said I think I misread it in the first place.

edited 10th Feb '11 4:44:54 AM by Yamikuronue

Frankly, I tend to make them links out of force of habit more than anything, since I feel it's good to make a habit out of linking works pages instead of just typing in the title.

I am in a similar situation. Also, when writing emails to Scottish people, I always pause a bit and worry about Mac Names splitting up before I remember it doesn't matter. Same with INITIA Ls.

I wonder if it might be possible for a tech solution: style the link differently, or even make it not a link at all. One version I've seen is to automatically convert all self-links to a bold non-link. (It's what Wikia does when you sign your own userpage.)

As for the potholes, kill 'em with fire. Okay, maybe not if it's Rule of Funny, but even then there's probably a way to get the same joke across without the pothole.

I oppose not making a link at all. The title being blue-texted and linked is not gratuitous, it means "complete with connotations, precedents and all, shadows of past and future applications, seen in the light of it being a trope and everything that implies".

There's a difference between saying that in work X Bob crosses paths with 3 different potential love interests, but in the end the first girl wins, and saying that in work X Bob crosses paths with 3 different potential love interests, but in the end the First Girl Wins. When we're making a wiki word for a trope we mean the latter sense, even if we're talking about it in its own page.

edited 17th Feb '11 5:54:42 AM by TripleElation

Yes, it usually is gratuitous. There's rarely a reason to actually use the name of the trope in an example for that trope. It's also considered bad page design to link to yourself—not that page design has ever been a big deal around here.

Well, would you be willing to elaborate on how and why the argument I described doesn't apply?

Ran into something that REALLY bothers me - in-page links to a redirect to the same page. Can we kill those? I don't necessarily read the list of redirects, so I find myself with 2-3 identical tabs because I think that's an interesting phrase and right-click.

Well, there are some redirects that carry slightly different meanings than the main title. The opposite gender titles for example.