Template talk:Db-bio

Proper target for the redirect
I think that db-bio should point to db-a7, not to db-person. Although "bio" is short for biography, which refers to a single person, I think that the actual usage of this template is that of db-a7. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll try to find the legacy threads, but db-bio is called with arguments to generate db-inc and db-web ... it's the db-a7 "generic" in the "default" mode ... I think that a redirect might break some of the bots ... OTOH, my choice of db-people avoids the confusion of redirects, etc. ... Happy Editing! &mdash;  18:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * OK ... see Template talk:Db-a7 for some background ... I say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." :-) Happy Editing! &mdash;  20:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Breaking the other A7 templates is no longer an issue, as all of them use db-a7 now. The question is: Should the target of this redirect be determined by the use of it (as a generic A7 template), or by the name (bio means one person). I think the first, but aparently some other users think the second. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * bio means biography. To me, it makes sense to have it redirect to db-person. The current use may be as a7, but new users are coming along all the time and I think that if we think ahead several years that it's easier for a lot of people to learn that bio means person than it is for a lot of new users to learn that bio doesn't mean person.  The idea is to keep things simple and logical. --Coppertwig (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, newer users who write articles about groups or web content will end up finding the article tagged with "it's about a real person", without the other possibilities. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

(reindent) Wow! I just stumbled across this thread again (I didn't have it watchlisted), and was surprised to see that it's still going ... in retrospect, I agree that it is a Good Time to buck the inertia of legacy functionality and correct a SNAFU ... OTOH, I'll probably continue to use  :-) ... Happy Editing! &mdash;  06:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)