FamilySearch Wiki talk:Naming Conventions: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 15: Line 15:


# In writing mailing addresses, users are accustomed to identifying a place from smallest to largest jurisdiction, such as "Rockville, Maryland, United States." Since this pattern is customary, it may be more intuitive for users.
# In writing mailing addresses, users are accustomed to identifying a place from smallest to largest jurisdiction, such as "Rockville, Maryland, United States." Since this pattern is customary, it may be more intuitive for users.
# Shorter titles can be better, but only if they help the user understand an article's subject matter without having to read the article. So an article titled "Jefferson," while short, would not tell users which of 114 places the article is about.
# Shorter titles can be better, but only if they help the user understand an article's subject matter without having to read the article. So an article titled "Jefferson," while wonderfully short, would not tell users which of 114 places the article is about.
# It can be helpful to users unfamiliar with a place's location to include more jurisdictional handles. <br>
# Including all jurisdictional handles in a title tends to result in many undesired search engine results. Thus, if towns are named like "Rockville, Montgomery County, Maryland, United States," an article on tax records of the town might be titled "Tax Rectords of Rockville, Montgomery County, Maryland, United States." But under such a system, if a user trying to find United States federal tax records searches "United States tax," the search engine results will list every article on tax records for every town in the U.S. rather than just articles on United States federal tax records.<br>


<br>
<br>
<!--{12069408751800} -->


== Resources ==
== Resources ==
4,497

edits