It would be less thrash to rename the few that don't already follow the majority pattern

True; but... Ugh?

But while that scheme would be somewhat easy for humans to predict, it would be a bit more involved for a program to do — which was my real reason for wanting the wikis renamed.

Then there are the nodelets

I don't think those are that important, since nobody (with the exception of the odd pmdev) links to nodelets.

So here's my thinking. I was going to make a set of faqstrings with the desired titles which then link to the wikis under their current names. That way, if someone thought that SiteDocClan wiki should DTRT, then at least they'll get a working link, at the cost to the user of one additional click.

But then I thought — why not rename the wikis as described above, and make a set of faqstrings with the old names which then link to the wikis under their new names? That way, old links still work, at the cost of one additional click.

Ugh?

I suspect that the reason that this scheme is the most common is not due to everybody sharing your dislike for it.

it would be a bit more involved for a program to do

You understate the problem; rather than a bit more complicated, it would likely be nearly a dozen bytes more complicated.

I personally prefer titles that read well. I don't believe that I was the only one following that scheme. The plural cases would read particularly awkwardly ("gods wiki", "janitors wiki", ...).

- tye        

ok, faqstrings created. fwiw.