![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At the top of the infobox the site is named "Thompson site". That part of the article I will leave for someone else to look at. -- The long road homw ( talk) 18:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a disagreement between editors about what should come immediately after the first three word of the article. My suggestion (and previosu edit) is,
"The Hansen Site— trinomial: 15GP14—is an archaeological site". My point is that the fourth "word" probably should not be a group of numbers/characters which is not explained. It probably is not good enough for a general encyclopedia, that the fourth word of an article needs to be clicked (so that the reader knows if there is some information at the linked site, that might be vital for the understanding of the rest of the text). If the fourth "word"—actually a non-word—of an article is cryptic (for a majority or minority of our readers), then that "word" needs a short explanation, such as " trinomial".
(Trinomials use in printed literature is believed (also by myself) to "save ink" and save effort and resources related to the writing of texts. Also the trinomials easily can identify uniqueness, regarding sites such as the Hansen site (which can come in handy when there are several Hansen Site'—in the same county or in other places which might contribute to confusion between similar sites). In theory, our articles do not need the trinomials, because the articles are not constricted by "the room for text on a printed page". I am not advocating that we remove trinomials from our articles. Just don't use unexplained trinomials in a sentence (or as the fourth word in article, with a sentence such as that)—that's my suggestion. -- The long road homw ( talk) 21:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hansen Site. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:06, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At the top of the infobox the site is named "Thompson site". That part of the article I will leave for someone else to look at. -- The long road homw ( talk) 18:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a disagreement between editors about what should come immediately after the first three word of the article. My suggestion (and previosu edit) is,
"The Hansen Site— trinomial: 15GP14—is an archaeological site". My point is that the fourth "word" probably should not be a group of numbers/characters which is not explained. It probably is not good enough for a general encyclopedia, that the fourth word of an article needs to be clicked (so that the reader knows if there is some information at the linked site, that might be vital for the understanding of the rest of the text). If the fourth "word"—actually a non-word—of an article is cryptic (for a majority or minority of our readers), then that "word" needs a short explanation, such as " trinomial".
(Trinomials use in printed literature is believed (also by myself) to "save ink" and save effort and resources related to the writing of texts. Also the trinomials easily can identify uniqueness, regarding sites such as the Hansen site (which can come in handy when there are several Hansen Site'—in the same county or in other places which might contribute to confusion between similar sites). In theory, our articles do not need the trinomials, because the articles are not constricted by "the room for text on a printed page". I am not advocating that we remove trinomials from our articles. Just don't use unexplained trinomials in a sentence (or as the fourth word in article, with a sentence such as that)—that's my suggestion. -- The long road homw ( talk) 21:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hansen Site. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:06, 29 October 2017 (UTC)