Page talk:Some Cities and San Francisco and Resurgam.djvu/9

Why are there red links on the text?
There doesn't seem to be any reason for them. Thatoneweirdwikier (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The links are relative links, meaning that the path is determined by the page you're on when you see them. An annoying byproduct of this approach is that in order for the links to work from the main page (in this case, Some Cities and San Francisco, and Resurgam), they will not work from the page to be transcluded (this page). If there's an elegant way around this, I don't know it. -Pete (talk) 19:39, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll leave it then. Thatoneweirdwikier (talk) 21:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. I'll ping the all-knowing to see if there is something significant I'm missing. -Pete (talk) 21:20, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Relative links are relative to the location. The transcluded pages are relative to Some Cities and San Francisco, and Resurgam, here they are relative to the page on which they are located. — billinghurst  sDrewth  21:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks . But, I thought I was following your guidance in using relative links to begin with. Clearly I've missed some nuance. Can you point me to guidelines around when it is appropriate to use relative links, vs. when absolute ones are preferred? -Pete (talk) 22:06, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, I found it. The simple answer is, relative links are recommended for page headers (where this problem will not come up, since there's no transclusion involved) -- but not for the body of transcluded works. I've been doing this wrong for a while, and will have to adjust. (Of course, the disadvantage of this is, if a work is moved -- e.g., if this one were moved to Some Cities and San Francisco and Resurgam without the comma), links like these will break.) Anyway, the relevant pages I found were:
 * WS:Multi-volume works
 * WS:Style guide
 * -Pete (talk) 17:31, 20 December 2019 (UTC)