Talk:Mimori Yusa

dates and date links
I will be removing all the date and year links, per WMOS.one external link is a ref for dates of release, i will put that in refs. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * my date delinking was reversed, which i think is in contravention of WMOS. to quote: "Month-day articles (February 24 and 10 July) should not be linked unless their content is germane and topical to the subject. Such links should share an important connection with that subject other than that the events occurred on the same date. For example, editors should not link the date (or year) in a sentence such as (from Sydney Opera House): "The Sydney Opera House was made a UNESCO World Heritage Site on 28 June 2007", because little, if any, of the contents of either June 28 or 2007 are germane to either UNESCO, a World Heritage Site, or the Sydney Opera House.


 * References to commemorative days (Saint Patrick's Day) are treated as for any other link. Intrinsically chronological articles (1789, January, and 1940s) may themselves contain linked chronological items.


 * Year linking
 * Year articles (1795, 1955, 2007) should not be linked unless they contain information that is germane and topical to the subject matter—that is, the events in the year article should share an important connection other than merely that they occurred in the same year. For instance, Timeline of World War II (1942) may be linked to from another article about WWII, and so too may 1787 in science when writing about a particular development on the metric system in that year. However, the years of birth and death of architect Philip C. Johnson should not be linked, because little, if any, of the contents of 1906 and 2005 are germane to either Johnson or to architecture."
 * Im not going to revert, as i would prefer someone else apply these guidelines as they understand them. after all, no one is perfect, let alone myself, and i may not be correct, or may have missed a policy about mass delinking, which i will try to research. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ok i found the arbitration ruling that this editor referred to. i was not part of this arbitration, thus i had no knowledge of this ongoing debate. i did not use a bot to delink, and all these dates were of the same type (its unlikely that the artists release dates are notable events for those years and days). however, i will refrain from doing delinking per arbitration, having no desire to be uncivil, and wanting to hold to any policies at WP.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Now that a WP approved delinking bot has fixed this, its a much better article. i did refrain from delinking, but now its not linked. i have yet to hear a good argument for keeping what was removed. i do think her birth year could be linked to that year in music. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 22:01, 25 December 2009 (UTC)