Talk:Golden Hills Elementary School

Red links

Whpq, please explain why you removed the {{for}} tag here. The deleted edits on this title relate to the school in Fullerton district so someone has been this way expecting to find that school. Although the links were red both were to titles which are very likely to be written in the fullness of time. Indeed special:whatlinkshere/Fullerton School District already shows three (article) space links.

I have been trying to persuade JoeCool950 that red links are OK when they point to unambiguously "wanted" articles. So it is rather depressing to find you take the opposite view. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The hatnote was removed per Wikipedia:Hatnote#Non-existent articles. If you want to create the article right now, then hatnote is appropriate. If we are waitign for the fullness of time to create them, then adding the hatnote then would be appropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

I was reading online, and there is indeed a "Golden Hills Elementary School" in Fullerton, so for this one why not move it to "Golden Hills Elementary School (Tehachapi)" (JoeCool950 (talk) 20:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Actually, there is not. There is a "Golden Hill Elementary School". Note the singular "Hill". -- Whpq (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Once the Golden Hill [no s] article is written, Whpq will permit me to re-instate the {{for}} tag (we call it "an hat note") as in this state. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:21, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm actually, one should only link the target article, and not any other terms as the hatnote is meant for navigation and the one link ensures the reader lands in the right place. But otherwise, yes. -- Whpq (talk) 22:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great, because could be confusing with names being similar. Hopefully, the page is wikified now, though. (JoeCool950 (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]