This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Popular cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Popular cultureTemplate:WikiProject Popular culturePopular culture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia
Strugglehouse (talk· contribs) changed the harrypotter.com URL in the infobox from "https://www.harrypotter.com/" to "https://harrypotter.com" saying Removing unnecessary "www." from website URL. After being reverted by me with the edit summary "www" is not unnecessary: the canonical URL is "https://www.harrypotter.com/", they reverted me, with the edit summary Absolutely no point in having this if the URL resolves without it.
If you check the web page source, you will see that the canonical URL contains "www", and it is common practice among webmasters and search engines to use the canonical URL and not some other URL that redirects to it (the name does resolve, but the web server has to redirect). So, imo, Strugglehouse's change is unnecessary – pointless, even – and incorrect. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs10:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Esowteric I disagree. The "www." is only needed if the website doesn't work without it. It adds unnecessary clutter to the infobox and looks less appealing. Multiple infobox documentation, including Template:Infobox company and Template:Infobox station, states "Do not include the leading www. unless the URL will not resolve without it." Therefore, it is completely unnecessary to include it unless required for the URL to function. Strugglehouse (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Well, if that's what the guidance says, then you're correct. Thanks. It's just that it creates work for the web server and the browser. Eg from an Apache virtualhost or .htaccess file, it may require a 301 redirect: