Content deleted Content added
→Your duplicate tags: response. |
|||
Line 242:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these [[User:DPL bot|opt-out instructions]]. Thanks, [[User:DPL bot|DPL bot]] ([[User talk:DPL bot|talk]]) 12:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
== Your
Hi, Jarble. I'm not understanding your
And even when articles share more text than just the summary, it's still fine as long as it's not too excessive. I notice that the tag links to [[Wikipedia:CFORK]]. But see what [[Wikipedia:CFORK#Related articles]] says. So pretty much, I don't even understand why the tag you're using exists. Duplication should only be an issue when there is extensive duplication or simply duplicate articles. [[Special:Contributions/46.165.208.13|46.165.208.13]] ([[User talk:46.165.208.13|talk]]) 09:33, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
:Should this tag only be used in cases of extensive duplication (i. e., copying several paragraphs of text)? I noticed that the article ''[[Animal nutrition]]'' duplicates much of the text of the article ''[[Nutrition]]''. [[User:Jarble|Jarble]] ([[User talk:Jarble#top|talk]]) 15:10, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
::Jarble, like I stated above, "There are plenty of articles that duplicate text because the text is relevant to more than just one article." Above, I also extended that to articles that share more than just the WP:Summary style text. Your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_nutrition&diff=prev&oldid=511080990 continued use] of the duplication tag still doesn't seem completely correct because, from what I can see, the articles are applying WP:Summary style. However, some of their sections are pointing to sections of other articles where the section isn't even going over anything new -- that is, they aren't extensively elaborating on the topic; as such, in those cases, the tag may be okay to use. But it just seems like a useless tag to me because so many Wikipedia articles have a small, meduim or large overlap. The duplication tag could apply to most of the articles on Wikipedia. Whatever the case, it definitely shouldn't be placed at the top of articles; it's a section tag, at least the one you're using, not a "whole article" tag. I'ved asked another editor to weigh in here -- [[User:Kiefer.Wolfowitz|Kiefer.Wolfowitz]] -- the one who talked to you about [[WP:OVERLINKING]]. It seems that you run into formatting issues, as in the correct way to format things, at times, and I believe this to be one of those cases. [[Special:Contributions/46.165.208.13|46.165.208.13]] ([[User talk:46.165.208.13|talk]]) 18:40, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
| |||