Preview
Issue #1
I think these links can be turned into <related> blocks. Are they related? Yes. Are they identifiable? Yes, I haven't seen any paragraphs ending with ">>" other than these related links.
- Sergey Pomogaylenko
- I agree that they "can be turned into <related>, but only can. It's a bad idea to mark as <related>-block simple lonely links in articles without any classes and ids just because of symbols in their text. Compare with obviously related box before it right from the text. That frame-link must be <related> in IV because it is separated from the text, and this just-link only can be <related>, but it is inside the text and we can't predict how strong it will be connected with text before or after it every page time
- Declined by admin
- These links are normal links and part of the text. It is indeed a bad idea to mark those as related. That might lead to normal text being formatted as related, even if it is a reference to another site.
Remember that the related article will NOT be displayed, if the template cannot generate IV for it.
- Type of issue
- IV page is missing essential content
- Reported
- Mar 8, 2019