The notion that the "natural" way to make pages is to create a link on an
existing page is only one of the possible information-architectural
approaches. It _does_ have some historical cachet as wiki orthodoxy, but
it's not necessary, strictly speaking.
"Orphans" are a problem only when interpage linking is viewed as the primary
method of finding content.
Users who depend on search or on browsing categories are unaffected by
"orphan" status of pages. This sounds like "jjd"'s situation.
[He may want
to consider ways to make categories easier or more obvious to browse; for
example, putting "Special:Categories" in the toolbox...]
-- Joshua
On 8/24/05 10:05 AM, "jdd" <jdd(a)dodin.org> wrote:
Jan Steinman wrote:
"Natural?" "Problem?"
I do this quite often. I see nothing unnatural about it at all.
editing the url bar is not so usual
It
causes me no problem. I would be very against
restricting this.
who said that?N
Just because something works differently than you had imagined does not
mean it is broken!
did you read the thread? the first post (as the subject) was
about orphans. This is the problem that started the thread.
With my kind of work there are never such orphans.
I use to give a name to my childs before the birthday :-)
but as I said anybody do what it wants
jdd