Board Thread:The Panopticon/@comment-1317169-20121202170842/@comment-188432-20130121161833

Tangerineduel wrote: As to T:HEAD the rule to link the References section subheadings has been around longer than the policy of T:HEAD. Could you please point me in the direction of this rule? I can't seem to find it. I've looked for a while now, and I can't find it. It's not in the format guides, and I'm not seeing it in early revisions of the MOS.

Why would we deliberately invite links in section heads? It just doesn't make sense, especially since our section head color has been the same as our link color for years now. It does no real good to link in a section head.

As for mobile, there's something weird going on, and I can't quite run it to ground. Go to the mobile version of The Snowmen, click on any of the major — i.e. h2, or — subheads. They're blue, but if you click on the blue word "Cast" or "Crew", the section merely reveals itself.

Now go to "References" and open that one. You'll note it reveals "Culural references", "Communication technology", "The Doctor", etc. But what happens if you click on these blue section heads? You get taken to another page. That's visually confusing. All section heads which are h3 or below should be black in wikiamobile.

And the weird thing is, linked section heads are usually disregarded by mobile, as you'll find at. The "Post-Regeneration" section there is linked in a very confusing way if you view it on the desktop. But it's not at all linked in mobile.

I can't figure out the technical difference between Eleventh Doctor and #References, but in any case it's a bad idea to be linking from section heads because either through our link coloring on desktop versions, or generally on mobile, the links don't show up anyway.

Except in References section. So, no, the references section shouldn't be allowed as an "exception" in mobile. What's the point of it? You can't use section heads to create a table. If you want a table, make a table.