Get Rid of Wall Banger red links

Yes, Wallbanger is old. I'm pretty sure Gus was still around when we made that.

And I don't think you even necessarily need to remove the word. The problem is that we don't want people thinking Wallbanger is a trope. It's perfectly fine to say that something doesn't make sense, as long as they aren't complaining about it.

And I do not like the idea that there is some rule that we can't change other people's words. It's not like we're deleting the examples, just fixing up the prose. This is a wiki, not your personal fan site.

And it's not like we didn't just get through deleting a bunch of Troper Tales examples for being too squicky.

edited 25th Feb '11 5:51:43 AM by BigT

Squicky is one thing, disagreeing with someone's opinion on their personal page is a little different. I've run into the same problem when cleaning the Adaptation Decay wicks. So far I've been skipping Contributors, JBM and WMG pages, but I'd also like some official standing on this.

There were about 2040 Wall Banger links this morning. Now there's 2085. This would be easier if the links weren't multiplying.

I'll get on it when I have some time this evening.

What we need is a script that slaps people across the face when they try to use Wall Banger.

Lots of potential in such a script!

Sadly, the Grapefruit Spoon Over IP protocol has yet to be implemented.

Under 2000! Woo!

Under 1900.

Is there an existing tool for hunting them down, other than simply hit-or-miss with the Google search?

Oh wait... related pages. Never mind. I'll try to kill some later when I have a moment. Also, under 1800 now. Ya'ay!

edited 26th Feb '11 11:04:10 AM by Agent0042

So, on the Dragonlance YMMV page there is a lot of stuff under the WallBanger entry. A lot of it is Natter. Can I delete the whole entry?

edited 26th Feb '11 1:24:55 PM by Galeros

If there doesn't appear to be anything actually worth saving, I'd say go for it.

I did it.

If it's something that's already on Darth Wiki anyway, can we redirect it to DarthWiki.Wall Banger instead of removing it?

Oh, this may already be known, but punctuated titles aren't working correctly on the Related to. It keeps saying that Wall Banger is in pages that it isn't, such as "What Do You Mean It's Not Didactic?"

edited 26th Feb '11 5:23:49 PM by Agent0042

Did you try the subpages? The "Related to" feature can't tell whether links are on the main entry or one of the subpages when it comes to ptitles.

Under 1700! They seem to have stopped multiplying so much, too.

Lady Momus, I guess that's why, then. Thank you.

It was at 1694 earlier. It's now up to 1712. Somebody is adding Wall Banger to pages.

Argh. Got it back under 1700; still going.

Is there a way to search recent edits for specific words?

Wall Banger is not appearing as a redlink when being potholed.

Curious. On here, it shows as a regular link when not potholed.

edited 28th Feb '11 7:58:59 PM by Agent0042

Down to less than 1000 now. Which means it's doing better than This Troper (over 1600), which has been red linked for much longer.

Under 700 .

edited 4th Mar '11 10:06:12 PM by vilefile

I've been chipping away at it. I've been trying to target what seems like the most popular works and tropes, and let Just Bugs Me and stuff like that sit for right now until we've cleaned out the main namespace first. That seems to make the most sense.

Re: This Troper - well, nobody's actively been trying to chip away at that one, have they? Maybe that could be the next project.

edited 4th Mar '11 6:01:52 PM by Agent0042

Under 500! We could potentially knock this out today or tomorrow.

Uh personally I'm not exactly happy about people making invasive edits on entries on the IJBM pages. I wouldn't care if you took out the potholes and just made wallbanger a word instead of a redlink, but rewording people's first-person written entries on a page where that is actually allowed is kind of obnoxious. Not like Serious Business obnoxious, but still kind of annoying, especially if there isn't actually a clear mod ruling on the matter yet.

edited 5th Mar '11 11:46:55 AM by Tyoria

I've tried to make it as least invasive as possible. I thought the goal was not only to remove the link but also try to strip away that specific phrasing where possible so people aren't tempted to make the link. But if people would prefer to just leave the words, that's fine. We asked for a clear ruling over a week ago - we never got one, which to me seems to be an implicit suggestion to kill references to Wall Banger with fire. That, plus the fact that nobody in power is complaining about such edits being made.

edited 5th Mar '11 12:32:54 PM by Agent0042