Timeline for Requesting clarity on edits that update redirecting URLs
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15 at 8:55 | comment | added | AJM | @Robotnik I've actually already asked about that, in a comment on that very question: "Can this bulk replacement tool automatically update each URL to the one it redirects to, or does this have to be a simple change like /osx/ to /mac/?" music2myear believed it had to be the latter, unfortunately, but if maintainers of the bulk tool disagree then I reckon there are a lot of these links that still need an update. | |
| May 15 at 1:06 | history | became hot meta post | |||
| May 15 at 0:42 | comment | added | Robotnik |
Note that for one-off link updates, what you're doing is fine. But I'm wondering just how many eg docs.microsoft -> learn.microsoft links need updating, and whether it's a good idea to escalate this to CMs for use in the Bulk updating tool? We've done similar in the past
|
|
| May 14 at 13:12 | history | edited | AJM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 50 characters in body
|
| May 14 at 11:58 | history | edited | AJM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Information on another edit rejection, this time where the URLs were both on the same microsoft.com subdomain
|
| May 13 at 14:51 | comment | added | music2myear | I'm the lone approver of that edit you linked. Perhaps the decliners weren't aware of microsoft moving many of their doc. links to learn.? There have been a spate of pointless, low quality edits that are not vandalism or spam, and approvers need to avoid getting stuck in ruts and should give each review task its own fresh attention, but sometimes I can guess a rut forms nonetheless. | |
| May 10 at 16:12 | comment | added | Ramhound | @AJM - See the note I made. | |
| May 10 at 15:37 | vote | accept | AJM | ||
| May 10 at 14:46 | comment | added | AJM | @Ramhound Thanks. Regarding "Be sure to include a note about the redirection." - I actually had! The edit summary was "Updated redirecting link", which was the only place I could have put any sort of note. | |
| May 10 at 14:45 | answer | added | Journeyman GeekMod | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 10 at 14:21 | comment | added | Ramhound | @AJM - "This edit was rejected by two out of the three reviewers, which surprised me as I've made a lot of these edits here in the past and they have always been accepted before." - This in my opinion is an invalid edit rejection. Be sure to include a note about the redirection. We want valid links, as long as it's a Microsoft website, I personally would always approve an edit like this. I took it upon myself to correct this error. | |
| May 10 at 11:42 | comment | added | AJM | @JourneymanGeek Sure - superuser.com/review/suggested-edits/1248693 | |
| May 10 at 10:20 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | can you link the edit suggestion? I wonder if it was unclear what the change was and why | |
| May 10 at 9:19 | history | asked | AJM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |