|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Malthusian
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Okay, first of all, nothing links to it. Second of all, the Malthus page links to the other page. I see no reason why this should be a fork page. --User:Brxbrx/sig 02:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Of course nothing links to it - it's a fork page. Qouth the template "Please avoid linking to this page, and reroute any links to the most relevant article. Now fork off!" Peter Urist for Mod! 02:20, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- The page has no reason for existing.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:22, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- There are two articles that are relevant to the title "Malthusian." I don't see a problem with the fork. Sam Tally-ho! 02:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Because Malthusian should link to Malthus. That's what people are talking about when they say Malthusian. The ideas put forth by Malthus. The other page is about the debate concerning those ideas, a debate not referenced by the word Malthusian. Malthusian means referring to Malthus, not referring to the Cornucopian vs. Malthusian debate. That's a whole other thing.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- But that would only matter if we were linking to it, which we aren't. Peter Urist for Mod! 02:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- (EC) What if people can't remember the other half of the debate's name, huh?? It allows people to explore the very Malthusian-relevant debate. You can still get to Malthus right from the fork page. But whatevs. Sam Tally-ho! 02:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- With that philosophy, the wiki would be slathered with fork pages. This way, they can go to the Cornucopia etc. page from the Malthus page.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Fork page. ArchieGoodwin (talk) 02:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- It's only a see also, and if that page was of any length it wouldn't be easily visible. Vote? Peter Urist for Mod! 02:47, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Fork page. ArchieGoodwin (talk) 02:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- With that philosophy, the wiki would be slathered with fork pages. This way, they can go to the Cornucopia etc. page from the Malthus page.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- (EC) What if people can't remember the other half of the debate's name, huh?? It allows people to explore the very Malthusian-relevant debate. You can still get to Malthus right from the fork page. But whatevs. Sam Tally-ho! 02:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- But that would only matter if we were linking to it, which we aren't. Peter Urist for Mod! 02:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Because Malthusian should link to Malthus. That's what people are talking about when they say Malthusian. The ideas put forth by Malthus. The other page is about the debate concerning those ideas, a debate not referenced by the word Malthusian. Malthusian means referring to Malthus, not referring to the Cornucopian vs. Malthusian debate. That's a whole other thing.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- There are two articles that are relevant to the title "Malthusian." I don't see a problem with the fork. Sam Tally-ho! 02:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- The page has no reason for existing.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:22, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Voting[edit]
Fork[edit]
- ArchieGoodwin (talk) 02:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Peter Urist for Mod! 02:53, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- Sam Tally-ho! 03:11, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- PintOfStout Talk Good people drink good beer. 03:31, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not a fan of needless fork pages, but I don't think this is a needless one.
Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 04:40, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Redirect[edit]
- --User:Brxbrx/sig 04:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)