FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style: Difference between revisions

interactive maps
(Jackson)
(interactive maps)
Line 27: Line 27:
Sometimes it's easier to just keep doing what's already being done than try to change everything. Chicago format was used for the research outlines -- the paper publications which made up the seed content for this site. Turabian and Shown Mills are both based on Chicago format. So if we went with Chicago, we wouldn't have to change thousands (tens of thousands?) of citations. And really, if Chicago were so broken for citing books and microfilms, would it still be around? [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)  
Sometimes it's easier to just keep doing what's already being done than try to change everything. Chicago format was used for the research outlines -- the paper publications which made up the seed content for this site. Turabian and Shown Mills are both based on Chicago format. So if we went with Chicago, we wouldn't have to change thousands (tens of thousands?) of citations. And really, if Chicago were so broken for citing books and microfilms, would it still be around? [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)  


=== Standardized Citation Style ===
=== Standardized Citation Style ===


I agree that  Chicago style with Shown Mills is  used for most professional reports and is comfortable for us.  Why make matters more complicated by redoing all the work entered from the old Research Guides? [[User:Proarenee|Proarenee]] 10:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree that  Chicago style with Shown Mills is  used for most professional reports and is comfortable for us.  Why make matters more complicated by redoing all the work entered from the old Research Guides? [[User:Proarenee|Proarenee]] 10:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)  


== Link to FHL works on FHLC  ==
== Link to FHL works on FHLC  ==
Line 48: Line 48:


For the large project of linking the BYU Family History Archives local histories, what do you see for the link to that entry as well as the FHLC entry. Just let one link to the FHLC do the job, or should there be the other link, such as you have done for WorldCat and the FHLC? adkinswh  30 Apr 2009  
For the large project of linking the BYU Family History Archives local histories, what do you see for the link to that entry as well as the FHLC entry. Just let one link to the FHLC do the job, or should there be the other link, such as you have done for WorldCat and the FHLC? adkinswh  30 Apr 2009  
== Disambiguation pages  ==
The style guide regarding disambiguation over at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(disambiguation_pages) Wikipedia] looks pretty good. Are there any changes we would want to make for the Research Wiki, or could we basically adopt the Wikipedia approach? [[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 05:56, 29 April 2009 (UTC)  We currently have two similar templates being used in much the same way, Template:Disambig and Template:Geodis. We should use the style guide to document how and when to use them, and if we want to stop using one, or continue using both. [[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 14:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


== MOS is guidelines hopefully, not policies  ==
== MOS is guidelines hopefully, not policies  ==
Line 131: Line 127:
= '''Naming conventions (geographic names)'''  =
= '''Naming conventions (geographic names)'''  =


{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" class="FCK__ShowTableBorders" style="border: 3px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); margin: 0.5em auto; clear: both; width: 87%; background-color: white;"
{| class="FCK__ShowTableBorders" style="clear: both; border-right: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; border-top: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; margin: 0.5em auto; border-left: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; width: 87%; border-bottom: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; background-color: white" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5"
|-
|-
| '''This guideline documents a FamilySearch Research Wiki naming convention.''' It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense and the occasional exception. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.<br>
| '''This guideline documents a FamilySearch Research Wiki naming convention.''' It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense and the occasional exception. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.<br>
Line 160: Line 156:
Names of '''''classes''''' of places do what English does. In particular, when dealing with administrative subdivisions, we write of ''United States counties'' and '''''Cook County, Illinois''''', or of ''Russian oblasts'' and the '''''Moscow Oblast''''', but of Chinese and Roman provinces, not ''sheng'' or ''provinciae''.  
Names of '''''classes''''' of places do what English does. In particular, when dealing with administrative subdivisions, we write of ''United States counties'' and '''''Cook County, Illinois''''', or of ''Russian oblasts'' and the '''''Moscow Oblast''''', but of Chinese and Roman provinces, not ''sheng'' or ''provinciae''.  


Also, use '''''Jackson Township, Hamilton, Indiana''''', but use '''''Cicero, Hamilton, Indiana''''' for an incorporated municipality.
Also, use '''''Jackson Township, Hamilton, Indiana''''', but use '''''Cicero, Hamilton, Indiana''''' for an incorporated municipality.  


== Disambiguation  ==
== Disambiguation  ==
Line 166: Line 162:
It is often the case that the same geographic place-name will apply to more than one place, or to a place and to other things of interest to genealogists such as a tribe or language; in either case disambiguation will be necessary. See [[wiki:Disambiguation|Wiki:Disambiguation]].  
It is often the case that the same geographic place-name will apply to more than one place, or to a place and to other things of interest to genealogists such as a tribe or language; in either case disambiguation will be necessary. See [[wiki:Disambiguation|Wiki:Disambiguation]].  


[[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 21:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
[[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 21:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)  


= '''Wiki:Disambiguation'''  =
= '''Wiki:Disambiguation'''  =


{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" style="border: 3px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); margin: 0.5em auto; clear: both; width: 87%; background-color: white;" class="FCK__ShowTableBorders"
{| class="FCK__ShowTableBorders" style="clear: both; border-right: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; border-top: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; margin: 0.5em auto; border-left: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; width: 87%; border-bottom: rgb(0,0,255) 3px solid; background-color: white" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5"
|-
|-
| '''This guideline documents FamilySearch Research Wiki disambiguation.''' It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense and the occasional exception. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.
| '''This guideline documents FamilySearch Research Wiki disambiguation.''' It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense and the occasional exception. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.
Line 208: Line 204:
== Disambiguation links  ==
== Disambiguation links  ==


Users searching for what turns out to be an ambiguous genealogical term may not reach the article they expected. Therefore any article with an ambiguous title should contain helpful links to alternative Research Wiki articles or disambiguation pages, placed at the top of the article (hatnotes). Always indent such notes. The format the hatnote disambiguation link could take should be either:<br>  
Users searching for what turns out to be an ambiguous genealogical term may not reach the article they expected. Therefore any article with an ambiguous title should contain helpful links to alternative Research Wiki articles or disambiguation pages, placed at the top of the article (hatnotes). Always indent such notes. The format the hatnote disambiguation link could take should be either:<br>


:''This article is about [brief description of TOPIC]. For other uses, see [TOPIC] (disambiguation).''
:''This article is about [brief description of TOPIC]. For other uses, see [TOPIC] (disambiguation).''
Line 214: Line 210:
:''This article is about [brief description of TOPIC#1]. For [brief description of TOPIC#2], see [TOPIC#2].''
:''This article is about [brief description of TOPIC#1]. For [brief description of TOPIC#2], see [TOPIC#2].''


For an example of the first kind of disambiguation link (used when there is a disambiguation page), see [[Iowa County, Wisconsin]].&nbsp; For an example of the second kind of disambiguation link (when a disambiguation page is '''not''' used), see [[New Brunswick, New Jersey]].
For an example of the first kind of disambiguation link (used when there is a disambiguation page), see [[Iowa County, Wisconsin]].&nbsp; For an example of the second kind of disambiguation link (when a disambiguation page is '''not''' used), see [[New Brunswick, New Jersey]].  


== Disambiguation pages  ==
== Disambiguation pages  ==
Line 267: Line 263:


[[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 15:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
[[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 15:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
== Interactive maps and lists of sub-division ==
The interactive maps are welcome and encouraged. However, for someone unfamiliar with the area's geography (or bad at reading maps), the maps may pose a challenge finding the sub-division of their choice. When employing an interactive map, the author should accompany that map with either (a) a short link to a page that shows an "Alphabetical List of States" (or whatever the sub-division is), or (b) such a list on the same page as the map. The alphabetical list should link to the same places as the links on the map. [[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 23:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
73,385

edits