Talk:Deja Vu (Katy Perry song)
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Categories
[edit]
Resolved@Ss112: Re: this diff: If we're going to include this song in Category:Katy Perry songs, then we should at least categorize the page with proper spelling (Déjà Vu (Katy Perry song)). ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:03, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Richhoncho: You may care to weigh in here. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:07, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Another Believer: Is this something you really feel it's worth having a debate about? Use of diacritics is not "proper spelling"; (most) Western keyboards do not have the capability to type an accented letter with a keystroke. It's a plausible search term and there's no reason why we can't categorise this redirect. In fact, I'm pretty sure at times you have created non-accented namespaces and categorised those too. Also, your ping of me didn't work. Ss112 19:16, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Ss112: Seems confusing to have 2 Katy Perry songs of similar title in Category:Katy Perry songs. If this isn't worth debating, then why not just remove the categories for this page, which does not include the diacritics that appear in the official track listing? (I'm not saying this page doesn't serve a purpose, I just don't think it should be categorized.) ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:17, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
If this isn't worth debating, then why not just remove the categories for this page?
Because I disagree with you, hence my revert? Reverting somebody does not require a debate. Ss112 19:20, 2 June 2017 (UTC)- @Ss112: I don't think your last comment was necessary, but do you think both pages need to appear in the category? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:21, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- How was it not necessary? It's stating a fact. You don't need to enter into a back-and-forth on a talk page every time somebody disagrees with you. Also, you don't need to keep pinging me. If you're so concerned about the neatness of a category page, I'll remove it, because this debate is a waste of time. Ss112 19:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- OK, great, thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- How was it not necessary? It's stating a fact. You don't need to enter into a back-and-forth on a talk page every time somebody disagrees with you. Also, you don't need to keep pinging me. If you're so concerned about the neatness of a category page, I'll remove it, because this debate is a waste of time. Ss112 19:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Ss112: I don't think your last comment was necessary, but do you think both pages need to appear in the category? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:21, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Ss112: Seems confusing to have 2 Katy Perry songs of similar title in Category:Katy Perry songs. If this isn't worth debating, then why not just remove the categories for this page, which does not include the diacritics that appear in the official track listing? (I'm not saying this page doesn't serve a purpose, I just don't think it should be categorized.) ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:17, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Another Believer: Is this something you really feel it's worth having a debate about? Use of diacritics is not "proper spelling"; (most) Western keyboards do not have the capability to type an accented letter with a keystroke. It's a plausible search term and there's no reason why we can't categorise this redirect. In fact, I'm pretty sure at times you have created non-accented namespaces and categorised those too. Also, your ping of me didn't work. Ss112 19:16, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yep, I made a mistake. So I shall make a couple of points :-
- I am getting pissed off with some editors creating redirects for every different possible variation of an album track. So unnecessary. If that's all an editor can do they need a new hobby.
- Where I see them, I mark, as appropriate, r from unnecessary disambiguation, r from diacritics, etc. I also remove any other categorisation (I note, at present both variants are in Category:2017 songs and Category:Katy Perry songs. WHY?
- I also remove WPSongs from misspellings, unnecessary disambiguation, if there was an easier process I'd delete the buggers.
- The search engine at WP is quite sophisticated these days, and will find the Katy Perry album under either version of this song title, and probably without the redirect as well!
- I think one day somebody will realise that redirects are not as cheap as some seem to think and there will be a wholesale clear out.
In response to the main question, the album article says the song has diacritics, so that's the song that should be categorised. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:58, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Richhoncho: If you are addressing me, please address me directly, otherwise it looks really passive-aggressive. Another Believer creates just as many redirects as I do, often for "every different possible variation" of a track's name. I didn't create this as a fulfilment of some hobby; I created it because it's a legitimate search function (because, as I already said, even if this didn't exist and readers had to go to a search results page, readers still cannot type in diacritics with a normal keyboard, so this would be what they're typing in). It exists for the same reason Deja Vu (Beyonce song) is a redirect. Besides, both versions of this page are no longer in Category:2017 songs and Category:Katy Perry songs, nor were they when you replied. I removed the categories from this redirect hours ago. I created this redirect days ago. This was resolved already. Ss112 23:47, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't mention anybody because I deemed it unnecessary to remember who it is - in fact I didn't even bother to check who had created the Katy Perry ones. There have been other editors too (although it looks like they have now stopped), so to name one or two people would be incorrect. I repeat the search function at WP is good enough that people creating redirects for the sake of redirects are doing more harm than good. BTW, I wrote but didn't save the post, went back later and just posted without checking what the current situation was - the really unnecessary thing is for one editor to pick up on it as if it had some deep significant meaning. BTW, Diacritics are NOT an issue in a search at WP. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:20, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Well, perhaps, as you say, one day all these redirects will be deemed useless. However—and it is not the reason I do it—there are a plethora of editors primed to create redirects for the latest pop song by whoever to come out, and somebody inevitably will create them for a pop album and its songs, so it really doesn't seem to be slowing any time soon, at least from where I'm sitting, whether that is for better or worse. Personally I don't see that it harms anybody, but there is a limit. Ss112 07:51, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Perhaps you should take some time to acquaint yourself with the excellent search facility at WP. And I am getting a little pissed off sorting out the mess redirect creators are making. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:04, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Richhoncho: Okay, great, will do. Ss112 10:28, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Perhaps you should take some time to acquaint yourself with the excellent search facility at WP. And I am getting a little pissed off sorting out the mess redirect creators are making. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:04, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Well, perhaps, as you say, one day all these redirects will be deemed useless. However—and it is not the reason I do it—there are a plethora of editors primed to create redirects for the latest pop song by whoever to come out, and somebody inevitably will create them for a pop album and its songs, so it really doesn't seem to be slowing any time soon, at least from where I'm sitting, whether that is for better or worse. Personally I don't see that it harms anybody, but there is a limit. Ss112 07:51, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't mention anybody because I deemed it unnecessary to remember who it is - in fact I didn't even bother to check who had created the Katy Perry ones. There have been other editors too (although it looks like they have now stopped), so to name one or two people would be incorrect. I repeat the search function at WP is good enough that people creating redirects for the sake of redirects are doing more harm than good. BTW, I wrote but didn't save the post, went back later and just posted without checking what the current situation was - the really unnecessary thing is for one editor to pick up on it as if it had some deep significant meaning. BTW, Diacritics are NOT an issue in a search at WP. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:20, 3 June 2017 (UTC)