Talk:Megabyte per second

Double redirect

Yes I know that redirecting to Megabyte per second results in a double-redirect, but what do we care? A minuscule amount of machine resource will just sort it out.

If the redirect target is snapped to the final target (Megabit per second), it could be harmful because someone might look at that and think that "MB/s" actually means "Megabits per second".

On balance, I think the double redirect is preferable here. Duckbill 23:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the general principle would be: Snap wikilinks to the target of redirections only when that makes it link a more specific term. In this case we have a generalised page describing both megabits per second and megabytes per second entitled "Megabit per second". Anyone wanting to link "Megabyte per second" may be tempted to snap their link to "Megabit per second" and avoid the redirect, but this is misguided because it now links an entirely different concept, not a more specific term — in this case it's less specific. So in this case we should link "Megabyte per second".

Conversely, someone wanting to wikilink the term "MB/s" would be better off snapping to "Megabyte per second" (e.g. [[Megabyte per second|MB/s]]) because "Megabyte per second" will always mean the same thing, whereas "MB/s" is something of an initialism and could potentially have other meanings. Duckbill 00:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Double redirects grossly undesirable. What that says is that Megabyte per second should be an article not a redirect. I have created it. Cburnett 00:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. (Though it's yet another one to fight over...) I asked on Talk:Bit_rate#Merging_the_little_bit_rate_articles.3F if it was worth creating separate articles for each. ~~For now I'll copy the bit rates and we can merge later?~~ Let's discuss it before I do all that work. Should we merge these all into one byte per second article? And the others into bit rate? — Omegatron 02:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]