![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | → | Archive 40 |
There is discussion at the above page which seeks a consensus on what term to use when describing the nationality of people from the United States of America in category titles which use the format nationality foo. Please participate. -- Hiding talk 10:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I'm currently writing an article about a defunct game, and I'm not quite sure what tense to use. Should I say "Z-G WAS the first", or "Z-G IS the first"? I'm fairly sure the latter is more correct from a purely english standpoint, but which does the wiki prefer, in this case? -- InShaneee 19:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I would like to find the appropriate place for discussion of whether all style articles should have the same style template -- two wikipedians deleted it from WP:Manual_of_Style_(mathematics) (I admit to being one of them), as the sidebar looks clumsy in that article. Perhaps there should be a separate "style 2" template which only has a pointer to this manual? -- Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Oughtn't there be some guidance on this page as to transliteration? For instance, we should say that Greek names ought to be Latinized - Herodotus, not Herodotos; Menelaus, not Menelaos; and so on. Given that this is almost always the more common English name, this is somewhat self-evident, but I think it should be instantiated as a rule. It'd be nice if we had some guidelines for translating, say, Arabic names, as well. -- john k 04:29, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
There is a section titled Loan words but which is about non-English or foreign words, rather than loan words as described in the loan words article. I suggest this section of MoS should be titled Non-English words rather than Loan words. I was going to suggest Foreign words but that is not always accurate for English-speaking countries that also have native languages (i.e. non-English but not foreign.) Nurg 23:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Do you think it would it be a lot of trouble to provide a special markup for spelling localisation? We could have something like
{{GB::colour|US::color}}
, so that WP would be displayed consistently in one style, according to user preferences. At the moment there are inconsistencies across related articles, or even in the same article. Plus some people tend to be anal about this and a lot of time is wasted "correcting" and "correcting" back, edit wars, etc. -- PizzaMargherita 10:26, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
I think even that idea is unnecessary. First, for all the debate and arguments - there are few differences between British and American English. For most articles, there's no difference at all. In others there are a few subtle differences - which could just as easily be typos as anything deliberate. In a very, very small number, there are substantial differences, but these tend to get edited out fairly quickly. So let's not make a mountain out of a molehill (it's only a few molehills we have at present), jguk 17:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
{{GB::labour|US::labor}}. The server would work out what a specific user wants to see and display the correct thing. Casual readers (i.e. not logged-in) would get the default. (Which default? I don't really care, but if you do, we could do something smart with the IP address.) Note that with this mechanism in place it is very unlikely that a casual reader changes a word to his preferred spelling, because as soon as they see the template, they think about it twice, possibly learn about yet another benefit of being logged in, and if they care so much about these things they will propagate this idiom in other articles and for other words. Also note that this mechanism can be extended easily to other varieties of the English language (Canadian, Australian, Jamaican, Liberian, you name it) if and when the need arises. Finally, the same mechanism can be used by other languages, some of which may well be even more susceptible to local varieties. PizzaMargherita 20:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I have a poor sense of {{GB::humour|US::humor}} because I'm a pizza.PizzaMargherita 21:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I have a poor sense of {{EN::humor}} because I'm a pizza.which would render as specified by your profile. PizzaMargherita 21:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
{{EN::humor}}and looking up a preference is gonna put unbearable strain on the servers. PizzaMargherita 22:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
← dragging this back to the left margin ← The difference between this proposal and supporting inline images is that images have the power to significantly improve the quality of our articles. Cloud would be a much weaker article with only verbal descriptions of cloud types. Tubular pin tumbler lock becomes virtually self-explanatory with its accompanying high-quality diagrams. Articles don't lose value or comprehensibility (except in certain extreme cases) when different English spellings are used. Although the developers can do whatever they want with the Mediawiki software, I imagine that they realize that offering colour/color preferences should be a low priority. TenOfAllTrades( talk) 23:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
How would the title of an article be handled? Will the title and URL of manual labour change according to one's preferences, or possibly appear in a different form of English than the body text. How will wiki links be handled?
Will this affect caching? Sounds like two or more versions of pages will be cached on the Squid servers. Or will each request with a different language force a page to be re-cached?
My biggest problem with this proposal is all the extra mark-up and duplicated words and phrases in Wikitext, which is already getting too hairy with lots of inline templates. It is counter to the idea that wikitext is easy to read and write. — Michael Z. 2005-11-6 19:12 Z
I have a poor sense of {{EN::humor}} because I'm a pizza.
There was immense [[dialect:en-GB|humour|en-US|humor]] in the way she fell off the [[dialect:en-GB|kerb|en-US|curb]].And wrapping the whole phrase could be:
[[dialect:en-GB|There was immense humour in the way she fell off the kerb|en-US|There was immense humor in the way she fell off the curb]].However, wrapping the whole phrase in this exampe is a little insane, but as I say I can't think of any grammar / punctuation / phrasing examples.
{{EN::humor}}to "humour" if your preference is en-GB and "humor" if your preference is en-US (and so on for other dialects). If users do not specify a preference, they get the default, which could be US, I don't care. If they care, they should set their preferences accordingly.
[[dialect:en-GB|humour|en-US|humor]]every time, because it would be redundant given the centralised database of variants. Redundant means potentially wrong, unnecessarily more difficult to maintain and more complicated.
I have a bot fixing various mistakes in the "see also" and "external links" sections, while is going it could easily turn "related topics" into "see also", as it seems a bit strange to me that we have 2 names for the same thing, especially as "related topics" isn't used that much anyway (at a guess I would say 90% of articles use "see also"). what do you think? Martin 17:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
By the way, the MoS on "See also" now says: "If you remove a redundant link from the See also section of an article, it may be an explicit cross reference (see below), so consider making the link in the main text bold instead" but there is no mention of makinging "explicit cross references" bold, nor anythining else about them, below, nor above on thsi page either. is this a reference to soemthign that was changed or removed? DES (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be at least two or three more pixels of spacing between paragraphs? I recently edited http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act and decided to double space the paragraphs. I think the paragraph spacing should be equal to the height of a line, like it is now in the text box I'm typing in.
Here's a second paragraph to demonstrate how close it is to the one above by default. The problem is made worse when the last line of the paragraphs end close to the right margin, because there's even less space to indicate the paragraph's end. If everyone indented, it wouldn't be such an issue, but I wouldn't suggest that.
This paragraph is double spaced from the one above. There should be no need to double space paragraphs to obtain proper spacing.
This paragraph is single spaced, plus I used the paragraph style "padding-top: 8px;", as I did with the one below. There's less spacing than the double carriage return, but this is acceptible to me too. I'm viewing it in Internet Explorer.
This paragraph is single spaced, plus I used the paragraph style "padding-top: 8px;", as I did with the one above. There's less spacing than the double carriage return, but this is acceptible to me too. I'm viewing it in Internet Explorer.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.247.88.14 ( talk • contribs) 2005-11-01 13:22:05
I went to this page (the project page, not this talk page) to see if it offered any advice on whether or not I should use spaces before and after mdashes and ndashes. It didn't address the topic, but I saw that the page actually follows both practices. For example, in the section on "Punctuation", it has:
I have a preference for spacing before and after, but it's not a strong preference. Obviously a space before but not after is wrong, as is a space after and not before. I sometimes come across errors these on Wikipedia, but if I'm correcting them, I'm not sure whether I should remove the space on one side or add it on the other. Is there a standard policy on Wikipedia? I'd like to be consistent.
Also, I've read comments on talk pages about when to use mdashes and when to use ndashes. I've also read about it in Hart's Rules There seem to be different opinions, and again, I'd like to follow the official policy, if there is one. Can anyone locate me to a page that would help me? Thanks. Ann Heneghan (talk) 11:11, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | → | Archive 40 |
There is discussion at the above page which seeks a consensus on what term to use when describing the nationality of people from the United States of America in category titles which use the format nationality foo. Please participate. -- Hiding talk 10:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I'm currently writing an article about a defunct game, and I'm not quite sure what tense to use. Should I say "Z-G WAS the first", or "Z-G IS the first"? I'm fairly sure the latter is more correct from a purely english standpoint, but which does the wiki prefer, in this case? -- InShaneee 19:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I would like to find the appropriate place for discussion of whether all style articles should have the same style template -- two wikipedians deleted it from WP:Manual_of_Style_(mathematics) (I admit to being one of them), as the sidebar looks clumsy in that article. Perhaps there should be a separate "style 2" template which only has a pointer to this manual? -- Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Oughtn't there be some guidance on this page as to transliteration? For instance, we should say that Greek names ought to be Latinized - Herodotus, not Herodotos; Menelaus, not Menelaos; and so on. Given that this is almost always the more common English name, this is somewhat self-evident, but I think it should be instantiated as a rule. It'd be nice if we had some guidelines for translating, say, Arabic names, as well. -- john k 04:29, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
There is a section titled Loan words but which is about non-English or foreign words, rather than loan words as described in the loan words article. I suggest this section of MoS should be titled Non-English words rather than Loan words. I was going to suggest Foreign words but that is not always accurate for English-speaking countries that also have native languages (i.e. non-English but not foreign.) Nurg 23:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Do you think it would it be a lot of trouble to provide a special markup for spelling localisation? We could have something like
{{GB::colour|US::color}}
, so that WP would be displayed consistently in one style, according to user preferences. At the moment there are inconsistencies across related articles, or even in the same article. Plus some people tend to be anal about this and a lot of time is wasted "correcting" and "correcting" back, edit wars, etc. -- PizzaMargherita 10:26, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
I think even that idea is unnecessary. First, for all the debate and arguments - there are few differences between British and American English. For most articles, there's no difference at all. In others there are a few subtle differences - which could just as easily be typos as anything deliberate. In a very, very small number, there are substantial differences, but these tend to get edited out fairly quickly. So let's not make a mountain out of a molehill (it's only a few molehills we have at present), jguk 17:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
{{GB::labour|US::labor}}. The server would work out what a specific user wants to see and display the correct thing. Casual readers (i.e. not logged-in) would get the default. (Which default? I don't really care, but if you do, we could do something smart with the IP address.) Note that with this mechanism in place it is very unlikely that a casual reader changes a word to his preferred spelling, because as soon as they see the template, they think about it twice, possibly learn about yet another benefit of being logged in, and if they care so much about these things they will propagate this idiom in other articles and for other words. Also note that this mechanism can be extended easily to other varieties of the English language (Canadian, Australian, Jamaican, Liberian, you name it) if and when the need arises. Finally, the same mechanism can be used by other languages, some of which may well be even more susceptible to local varieties. PizzaMargherita 20:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I have a poor sense of {{GB::humour|US::humor}} because I'm a pizza.PizzaMargherita 21:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I have a poor sense of {{EN::humor}} because I'm a pizza.which would render as specified by your profile. PizzaMargherita 21:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
{{EN::humor}}and looking up a preference is gonna put unbearable strain on the servers. PizzaMargherita 22:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
← dragging this back to the left margin ← The difference between this proposal and supporting inline images is that images have the power to significantly improve the quality of our articles. Cloud would be a much weaker article with only verbal descriptions of cloud types. Tubular pin tumbler lock becomes virtually self-explanatory with its accompanying high-quality diagrams. Articles don't lose value or comprehensibility (except in certain extreme cases) when different English spellings are used. Although the developers can do whatever they want with the Mediawiki software, I imagine that they realize that offering colour/color preferences should be a low priority. TenOfAllTrades( talk) 23:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
How would the title of an article be handled? Will the title and URL of manual labour change according to one's preferences, or possibly appear in a different form of English than the body text. How will wiki links be handled?
Will this affect caching? Sounds like two or more versions of pages will be cached on the Squid servers. Or will each request with a different language force a page to be re-cached?
My biggest problem with this proposal is all the extra mark-up and duplicated words and phrases in Wikitext, which is already getting too hairy with lots of inline templates. It is counter to the idea that wikitext is easy to read and write. — Michael Z. 2005-11-6 19:12 Z
I have a poor sense of {{EN::humor}} because I'm a pizza.
There was immense [[dialect:en-GB|humour|en-US|humor]] in the way she fell off the [[dialect:en-GB|kerb|en-US|curb]].And wrapping the whole phrase could be:
[[dialect:en-GB|There was immense humour in the way she fell off the kerb|en-US|There was immense humor in the way she fell off the curb]].However, wrapping the whole phrase in this exampe is a little insane, but as I say I can't think of any grammar / punctuation / phrasing examples.
{{EN::humor}}to "humour" if your preference is en-GB and "humor" if your preference is en-US (and so on for other dialects). If users do not specify a preference, they get the default, which could be US, I don't care. If they care, they should set their preferences accordingly.
[[dialect:en-GB|humour|en-US|humor]]every time, because it would be redundant given the centralised database of variants. Redundant means potentially wrong, unnecessarily more difficult to maintain and more complicated.
I have a bot fixing various mistakes in the "see also" and "external links" sections, while is going it could easily turn "related topics" into "see also", as it seems a bit strange to me that we have 2 names for the same thing, especially as "related topics" isn't used that much anyway (at a guess I would say 90% of articles use "see also"). what do you think? Martin 17:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
By the way, the MoS on "See also" now says: "If you remove a redundant link from the See also section of an article, it may be an explicit cross reference (see below), so consider making the link in the main text bold instead" but there is no mention of makinging "explicit cross references" bold, nor anythining else about them, below, nor above on thsi page either. is this a reference to soemthign that was changed or removed? DES (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be at least two or three more pixels of spacing between paragraphs? I recently edited http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act and decided to double space the paragraphs. I think the paragraph spacing should be equal to the height of a line, like it is now in the text box I'm typing in.
Here's a second paragraph to demonstrate how close it is to the one above by default. The problem is made worse when the last line of the paragraphs end close to the right margin, because there's even less space to indicate the paragraph's end. If everyone indented, it wouldn't be such an issue, but I wouldn't suggest that.
This paragraph is double spaced from the one above. There should be no need to double space paragraphs to obtain proper spacing.
This paragraph is single spaced, plus I used the paragraph style "padding-top: 8px;", as I did with the one below. There's less spacing than the double carriage return, but this is acceptible to me too. I'm viewing it in Internet Explorer.
This paragraph is single spaced, plus I used the paragraph style "padding-top: 8px;", as I did with the one above. There's less spacing than the double carriage return, but this is acceptible to me too. I'm viewing it in Internet Explorer.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.247.88.14 ( talk • contribs) 2005-11-01 13:22:05
I went to this page (the project page, not this talk page) to see if it offered any advice on whether or not I should use spaces before and after mdashes and ndashes. It didn't address the topic, but I saw that the page actually follows both practices. For example, in the section on "Punctuation", it has:
I have a preference for spacing before and after, but it's not a strong preference. Obviously a space before but not after is wrong, as is a space after and not before. I sometimes come across errors these on Wikipedia, but if I'm correcting them, I'm not sure whether I should remove the space on one side or add it on the other. Is there a standard policy on Wikipedia? I'd like to be consistent.
Also, I've read comments on talk pages about when to use mdashes and when to use ndashes. I've also read about it in Hart's Rules There seem to be different opinions, and again, I'd like to follow the official policy, if there is one. Can anyone locate me to a page that would help me? Thanks. Ann Heneghan (talk) 11:11, 3 November 2005 (UTC)