FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style: Difference between revisions

From FamilySearch Wiki
VisualWikitext
(Moved citation format discusssion to its own page)
m (Text replacement - "FHLC" to "FS Catalog")
 
(68 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
__TOC__  
{{talk header}} __TOC__  


== Proposals being discussed  ==
This is the place for discussing stylistic details that affect many pages on the wiki. It covers mostly content changes that affect collections of wiki pages, whereas stylistic issues regarding the user interface, or general look and feel of the site, can be found [[FamilySearch Wiki:Site Design Ideas|elsewhere]].   


#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Consensus|FamilySearch Wiki Talk:Consensus]]
This page covers two kinds of stylistic ideas: 
#FamilySearch Wiki Talk:Source Citation Formats


#Ideas that have reached a consensus among the FamilySearch Wiki community and can thus be executed over many pages. 
#Ideas that have been proposed and need further discussion and consensus before implementation. (These ideas cannot be implemented over many pages until they have achieved a consensus decision.)


If you have an idea to add to the Manual of Style (MOS), see [[FamilySearch Wiki:Transforming a Style Idea to a Manual of Style Guideline|Transforming a Style Idea to a Manual of Style Guideline]], and then add your topic to Proposals being discussed section below.


== Link to FHL works on FHLC ==
== Issues that have reached a consensus decision ==


FamilySearch Wiki references thousands of books and microform at the Family History Library. It is proposed that each reference be linked to the FHL entry which lists all editions of the work in question. So a reference like this:
*[[FamilySearch Wiki:Use History Heading Rather than Local Histories Heading in Place Pages|Use "History" Heading Rather than "Local Histories" in Place Pages]]
*[[FamilySearch Wiki:Format for Citing and Linking to Works in FS Catalog, Worldcat (OCLC)|Format for Citing and Linking to Works in FS Catalog, Worldcat (OCLC)]]


Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. (Family History Library book 941.5 D27gj.)
== Proposals being discussed  ==


...would look like this:  
#Table of Contents: To Hide or Display by Default
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Separator for Items in See Also Section]]  
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. (Family History Library book [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titlehitlist&columns=*%2C0%2C0&callno=941.5+D27gj 941.5 D27gj].)
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Buttons|Buttons]]  
 
#[[Access Codes|Access Codes]] (how to designate whether a linked site is free or fee-based)
[[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Breadcrumb Trails|Breadcrumb Trails]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Changing the Size of Font or the Color of Heading 1|Changing the Font Size and Color of Heading 1]]
<br>
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Adding References or Links to Books for Sale|Adding References or Links to Books for Sale]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Consensus|FamilySearch Wiki Talk:Consensus]]  
I agree with the Chicago Manual of Style, due to wide recognition/acceptance.
#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Source Citation Formats|FamilySearch Wiki Talk:Source Citation Formats]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Format for Citing and Linking to Works in FS Catalog, Worldcat (OCLC)|Linking to works in the FamilySearch Catalog (FS Catalog)&nbsp;and Worldcat (OCLC)]]  
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? [[User:Adkinswh|Adkinswh]] 13:00, 30 Apr 2009 (UTC)
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Naming Conventions for Geographic Names|Naming Conventions for Geographic Names]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Disambiguation|Disambiguation]]  
As long as I recall correctly, someone was going to talk to the FHLC people about opening up the standard numbers that is used by WorldCat, etc. that is currently stored internally by the FHLC people. Okay, I am having a slight brain-cramp on the name of this. I hope you understand what I am trying to type. Anyway, that seems like it would be great. Also, I am of the opinion, if at all possible, that the links in FHLC references should be done in a template, plug-in, or something. When the FHLC changes, it would be very nice to change it in one place. [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] 16:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Interactive Maps and Lists of Sub-divisions|Interactive Maps and Lists of Sub-divisions]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Linking to Directory Sites Whose External Links to Paid Sites are Ambiguous|Linking to Directory Sites Whose External Links to Paid Sites are Ambiguous]]  
<br>
#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Names, Personal vs Names Personal|"Names, Personal" versus "Names Personal"]]
 
#"Language and Languages" versus "Languages"
I may be missing something obvious, but why direct wiki readers to the FHL for a book? &nbsp;What percentage of wiki users would have access to the FHL book collection in SLC (since the FHL doesn't loan, right?). &nbsp;It makes perfect sense to link to a microfilm in the FHL catalog because anyone can do something with that information (i.e., go to a FHC and order the film). I think book references should link to a more universally accessible resource (like WorldCat or Google Books). [[User:Lembley|Eirebrain]] 00:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Localities Template to Replace Populated Places Section|Localities template to replace populated places section]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Infobox Template|Infobox template]]  
The rule is try to find Google books, other places having the same books and list them first with FHL books always listed last, unless it's Family History Archive at BYU. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 04:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
#[[Template talk:Wpd|Wpd (Wikipedia) template]]  
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Linking|Linking]]&nbsp;  
== MOS is guidelines hopefully, not policies  ==
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Spelling in the English-language Wiki|Spelling in the English-language wiki]]
 
#[[FamilySearch Wiki:Naming a Project|Naming a project]]  
I like the idea of guidelines, and a way to suggest such on this page. I hope that contributors will take them as such and not assume that they&nbsp; are a "must". I haven't looked but wonder what Wikipedia's guidelines are for their pages. Many of them have the same look. [[User:Anne|Anne]] 17:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
#[[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Web Sites versus websites|Web sites or websites]]
 
== Format for OCLC and FHLC works  ==
 
If a work is available in both WorldCat and FHLC, should both references be given in the Wiki? I propose that they both be listed, with OCLC reference first and FHLC reference second, in this format:
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([http://www.worldcat.org/ WorldCat]&nbsp;[http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/68627254/editions?editionsView=true&referer=di 68627254]; [[The Family History Library|FHL]] book [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titlehitlist&columns=*%2C0%2C0&callno=941.5+D27gj 941.5 D27gj].)&nbsp;
 
[[User:Alan|Alan]] 20:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 
I like the idea, Alan. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 19:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 
On 21 April 2009 those in attendance at the&nbsp;Community Meeting reached consensus that we should have not two links to a work in a collection, but one. So instead of a reference like this...
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([http://www.worldcat.org/ WorldCat]&nbsp;[http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/68627254/editions?editionsView=true&referer=di 68627254]; [[The Family History Library|FHL]] book [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titlehitlist&columns=*%2C0%2C0&callno=941.5+D27gj 941.5 D27gj].)&nbsp;
 
...the reference would look like this...
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/68627254/editions?editionsView=true&referer=di WorldCat 68627254]; [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titlehitlist&columns=*%2C0%2C0&callno=941.5+D27gj FHL 941.5 D27gj].)&nbsp;  
 
The idea behind the simplification of links is&nbsp;this: The links should be simplified to avoid confusing&nbsp;the user.&nbsp;In the earlier iteration, the link on "WorldCat"&nbsp;leads to the Worldcat Home page or About page so that a reader unfamiliar with WorldCat can easily find out what it was. The other link -- the one to the WorldCat title number -- leads right to the listing for the book in question.&nbsp;The link to "FHL" leads to a wiki page about the FHL; the call number&nbsp;leads to the Family History Library entry for that book. It was posited that having two links -- one to define the collection/library and the other to lead to the book entry -- is confusing.
 
In Community Group meeting, it was posited that the links to the pages that describe the libraries/collections/catalogs (such as FHL or WorldCat) be nixed, that these links should be consolidated to go only to the catalog entry in question, and that if the user who is&nbsp;led to the catalog entry still has questions about the nature of the catalog/library/collection itself, they can&nbsp;simply navigate around that catalog's site for answers. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 18:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 
:I prefer the second version above, the one with WorldCat listed first followed by FHL. I prefer to see one link to the FHL catalog, instead of having no inclusive link for the word book/film/fiche. [[User:Anne|Anne]] 18:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 
== Creating Numerous, Repetitive Links  ==


Creating links of an oft-repeated phrase, title, word or acronym can be easily accomplished using OpenOffice, which can be downloaded for free. From FSWiki, copy a page (containing the repeated word or phrase)&nbsp;in WikiText mode and paste it into OpenOffice.&nbsp;&nbsp;Do&nbsp;a&nbsp;Find and Replace (binoculars icon)&nbsp;for the word or phrase with link brackets added,&nbsp;click&nbsp;'Replace All'&nbsp;and close.&nbsp;&nbsp;Copy and paste the page with links back into the Wiki, still in WikiText mode, and save. &nbsp;It's slick and saves a lot of time, effort, and sanity.&nbsp; [[User:Bakerbh|Bakerbh]] 22:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
== What to do with Help:Naming Conventions?  ==


:A Find and Replace option is also available in FCKEditor, the default editing sofware that pops up when you click "Edit" on a wiki article. The Find and Replace icon looks like a capital A and B with some dotted arrows. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 18:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
[[Help:Naming conventions|Help:Naming conventions]] was created before we had the Manual of Style. It was also created "back in the day" when we discussed stylistic items in User Group meeting (Community Meeting) to reach consensus. Since Help:Naming Conventions deals with style more than instructions, I'm thinking it should be added to the FamilySearch Wiki namespace.&nbsp;I also wonder which (if any) of the conventions on Help:Naming Conventions&nbsp;deserves to be added to the Manual of Style or this&nbsp;discussion page. [[User:RitcheyMT|Ritcheymt]] 04:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)  


::This may work for some things, but not if there is a link embedded in the text.&nbsp; I tried.&nbsp; [[User:Bakerbh|Bakerbh]] 19:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
:I support the proposal to move [[Help:Naming conventions]] to the ''FamilySearch Wiki'' namespace. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] 09:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


== Replace&nbsp;"Family History Library" with "FHL" in references  ==
:I also support the move and have added a discussion item to the page itself and also the "Move" template on the page. --Fran 18:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 
FamilySearch Wiki references&nbsp;thousands of books, microfilms, and fiche at the Family History Library. Each of these references&nbsp;contains the words "Family History Library," such as&nbsp;the following:  
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. (Family History Library book [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titlehitlist&columns=*%2C0%2C0&callno=941.5+D27gj 941.5 D27gj].)&nbsp;&nbsp;
 
For readability's sake, some users are calling for the words "Family History Library" in these links be shortened to "FHL" and made into a link which introduces the FHL to those who don't already know the acronym.
 
So the new style would look like this:
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([[The Family History Library|FHL]] book&nbsp; [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titlehitlist&columns=*%2C0%2C0&callno=941.5+D27gj 941.5 D27gj].)
 
This idea was proposed by [[User:Dsammy|Dsammy]]. I am serving as his scribe here. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 19:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 
:As mentioned below, I suggest FHL not be linked.&nbsp; When they click on the call number link, they will learn quickly enough that FHL stands for the Family History Library.&nbsp; I prefer the acronym for the same reason, and it's shorter.&nbsp;&nbsp;[[User:Bakerbh|Bakerbh]] 21:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 
:I agree with bakerbh. The acronym is sufficient. I'm sure one day we'll see the acronyms TNA (The National Archives), LOC (Library of Congress), ACPL (Allen County Public Library), NARA (National Archives Records Administration), and so forth.<br>
 
:The volunteers who started the project of linking call numbers to the catalog were given guidelines. After that, volunteers chose to do what they thought best. Some chose to type Family History Library; some FHL. Some linked an entire string, including the words Family History Library or FHL. Some chose to link only the film/fiche of book number. Some chose to link the book number, then link a film/fiche number separately, even though the links went to the same catalog record. [[User:Anne|Anne]] 17:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 
== Referencing OCLC/Worldcat works  ==
 
It is proposed that references&nbsp;to works found on OCLC/Worldcat&nbsp;should be linked to the "All editions and formats" entry for that work in OCLC/WorldCat. One&nbsp;question is how the entry should look. Which of the following (or some variant) would work best if we adopt this proposal?
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors: The Complete Guide''. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([http://www.oclc.org/worldcat/ OCLC]&nbsp;[http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/68627254/editions?editionsView=true&referer=di 68627254].)
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors'': The Complete Guide. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([http://www.worldcat.org/ WorldCat]&nbsp;[http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/68627254/editions?editionsView=true&referer=di 68627254].)&nbsp;
 
Grenham, John. ''Tracing Your Irish Ancestors'': The Complete Guide. Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. ([http://www.oclc.org/worldcat/ OCLC/WorldCat]&nbsp;[http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/68627254/editions?editionsView=true&referer=di 68627254].)
 
[[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 19:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 
:The second style seems the best--WorldCat is more recognized, is part of the domain name, and putting both OCLC and WorldCat looks unattractive. [[User:Alan|Alan]] 20:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 
:As long as the&nbsp;record identifies what resource you are in (when you click on the item number), I don't think the resource name or acronym needs to be a link.&nbsp; I would use WorldCat because that is what appears in the record when you click on the link.&nbsp; [[User:Bakerbh|Bakerbh]] 21:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


== Guidelines for large projects  ==
== Guidelines for large projects  ==


It would be helpful to have some guidelines established for large projects, such as the pages created for US state or county pages. I'm thinking specifically of the England probate registers project that includes a page for each of the 40 counties. It's user-friendly to have the same "look and feel", including the heading and subheading styles. [[User:Anne|Anne]] 18:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)  
It would be helpful to have some guidelines established for large projects, such as the pages created for US state or county pages. I'm thinking specifically of the England probate registers project that includes a page for each of the 40 counties. It's user-friendly to have the same "look and feel", including the heading and subheading styles. [[User:WuehlerAC|Anne]] 18:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)  
 
= '''Naming conventions (geographic names)'''  =
 
{| 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 page describes conventions for determining the names of Research Wiki articles on places. Our naming policy provides that article names should be chosen for the general reader, not for specialists. By following modern English usage, we also avoid arguments about what a place ''ought'' to be called, instead asking the less contentious question, what it ''is'' called.
 
== Country names in English  ==
 
Use the form of a current country's name as it appears in the CIA [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/ ''World Factbook''].
 
When a ''widely accepted English name'', exists for a former country or empire, we should use it. For example, [[New Spain|New Spain]] rather than ''Virreinato de Nueva España'', [[Ottoman Empire|Ottoman Empire]] rather than دولتْ علیّه عثمانیّه or ''Osmanlı İmparatorluğu''.
 
:I agree. It might be nice to show the country name in the native language(s) within the body of the article. Wikipedia does this as can be see with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain Spain] (example). I believe this allows searching to find either. [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas Lerman]] 16:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 
== Browse by Country page, and Category:Countries  ==
 
Use the CIA [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/ ''World Factbook''] to determine which nations are listed on the [[Browse by Country|Browse by Country]] Wiki page, and in the [[:Category:Countries]]. Only continuously inhabited places with indigenous populations in the ''World Factbook'' are eligible.
 
Countries which are not listed in the ''World Factbook'' should not appear on the ''Browse by Country'' page, or in the ''Category:Countries.'' However, they may be appropriate as part of another country's page/category, or on the [[List of extinct states|List of extinct states]] page, or in the [[:Category:Former Countries|Category:Former Countries]].
 
== Country sub-divisions: as in the FHL Catalog  ==
 
For places smaller than a country use the name as it would appear if it were in the [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=localitysearch&columns=*,0,0 Place Search] of the Family History Library Catalog. However, normally write the name in order from smallest to largest jurisdiction, for example, ''Chicago, Cook, Illinois''.
 
Also, use diacritics as they would appear in the [http://www.familysearch.org/eng/library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=localitysearch&columns=*,0,0 Place Search] of the Family History Library Catalog, for example, ''Höfgen (AH. Meißen), Sachsen, Germany''.
 
=== Administrative sub-divisions  ===
 
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.
 
== 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)
 
:The ''wiki:Disambiguation'' link in the paragraph above is not working. If there is something else that needs reviewing, would someone update the link? I would update the link myself, but I'm not sure where it was intended to go. Also note that one of the current [[Policy:FamilySearch Wiki Policies|Policies]] in the Wiki is for [[Policy:Disambiguation|Disambiguation]]. The [[Policy Talk:Disambiguation|Disambiguation Discussion]] page for this policy is also available (although it is currently empty). [[User:Franjensen|Franjensen]] 15:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 
:Once it is formally adopted by our Wiki community, the said link should be to our own internal article (the next one on this list of proposed MOS items). [[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 01:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 
= '''Wiki:Disambiguation'''  =
 
{| 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.
|}
 
Disambiguation in FamilySearch Research Wiki is the process of resolving conflicts in Wiki article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic, making that term likely to be the natural title for more than one article. In other words, disambiguations are paths leading to different articles which could, in principle, have the same title.
 
For example the word '''Delaware''' may be of interest to genealogists as an American Indian tribe, that tribe's language, a United States colony-state, county, town, township, river, or a river cut through a mountain.
 
There must then be a way to direct the reader to the correct specific article when an ambiguous term is referenced by linking, browsing or searching; this is what is known as disambiguation. In this case it is achieved using the [[Delaware (disambiguation)]] page.
 
Two methods of disambiguating are discussed here:
 
:*'''disambiguation links''' – at the top of an article (''hatnotes''), that refer/link the reader to other Wiki articles with similar titles or concepts.
:*'''disambiguation pages''' – non-article pages that refer/link readers to other Wiki articles.
 
== Deciding to disambiguate  ==
 
Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might use the "Go button", there is more than one Wiki article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead. In this situation there must be a way for the reader to navigate quickly from the page that appears on hitting "Go" to any of the other possible desired articles.
 
There are three principal disambiguation scenarios, of which the following are examples:
 
*The page at '''[[Georgia]]''' is a ''disambiguation page'', leading to all the alternative family history uses of "Georgia".
*The page at '''[[Portal:Iowa|Iowa]]''' is about one usage, called the ''primary topic'', and there is a hatnote guiding readers to '''[[Iowa (disambiguation)]]''' to find the other uses.
*The page at '''[[Portal:New Brunswick|New Brunswick]]''' is about the primary topic and there is only one other genealogical use. The other use is linked directly using a hatnote; no disambiguation page is needed.
 
== Is there a primary topic?  ==
 
When there is a well-known '''primary topic''' for an ambiguous family history term, name or phrase, much more used than any other topic covered in Research Wiki to which the same word(s) may also refer (significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings), then that term or phrase should either be used for the title of the article on that topic or redirect to that article. If the '''primary topic''' for a term is titled something else by the naming conventions, then a redirect for the term is used. Any article which has primary usage for its title and has other uses should have a disambiguation link at the top, and the disambiguation page should link back to the primary topic.
 
== Disambiguation page or disambiguation links?  ==
 
If there are three or more topics associated with the same term, then a disambiguation page should normally be created for that term (in which case disambiguation links are desirable on the specific topic articles – see below). If only a primary topic and one other topic require disambiguation, then disambiguation links are sufficient, and a disambiguation page is unnecessary. However if there are two topics for a term but neither is considered the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is used.
 
For more about disambiguation links, see Disambiguation links below. For rules about naming disambiguation pages and combining similar terms on a single page, see Disambiguation pages.
 
== 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>
 
:''This article is about [brief description of TOPIC]. For other uses, see [TOPIC] (disambiguation).''
 
:''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]].
 
== Disambiguation pages  ==
 
=== Combining terms on disambiguation pages  ===
 
A single disambiguation page may be used to disambiguate a number of similar family history terms.
 
When a combined disambiguation page is used, hatnotes should be set up from all the Wiki pages involved.
 
=== Naming the disambiguation page  ===
 
The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term, as in [[Georgia|Georgia]]. If there is a primary topic, then the tag "(disambiguation)" is added to the name of the disambiguation page, as in [[Delaware (disambiguation)|Delaware (disambiguation)]].
 
When a disambiguation page combines several similar terms, one of them must be selected as the title for the page (with the "(disambiguation)" tag added if a primary topic exists for that term).
 
=== Page style  ===
 
Each disambiguation page comprises a list (or multiple lists, for multiple senses of the term in question) of similarly-titled links.
 
*Link to the primary topic (if there is one):
 
:[[Portal:Alabama|'''Alabama''']], a southern state of the United States
 
*Start each list with a short introductory sentence fragment with the title in bold, and ending with a colon. For example:
 
:'''Alabama''' may refer to:


*Try to start each entry in the list with a link to the target page.
== A Place to Start  ==
*Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link; including more than one link can confuse the reader.


==== Add a template to show page status  ====
I think it would be easiest to piggyback of what other wikis have done. People who begin contributing may already be used to these conventions. For example, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style Wikipedia Manual of Style] gives some great ideas on what our conventions should be. Perhaps we lift from there and then change things as it becomes necessary to do so. --[[User:Gregorybean|Gregorybean]] 02:16, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


Include either the template [[Template:Geodis|<nowiki>{{</nowiki>Geodis<nowiki>}}</nowiki>]], or the template [[Template:Disambig|<nowiki>{{</nowiki>Disambig<nowiki>}}</nowiki>]] on the page as an indicator of the page's status.
== Links  ==


===== Geodis vs. Disambig  =====
What ever happened to format for the displayed text for links? If I remember correctly, "Click here to . . ." was considered an incorrect way to format them. I believe [[Help:Create an external link|Create an external link]] talks about this subject. [[User:Thomas Lerman|Thomas_Lerman]] 12:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


*Select the template <nowiki>{{</nowiki>Geodis<nowiki>}}</nowiki> when the only titles to disambiguate are '''place-names'''.
== Integration and links to other subjects  ==
*Select the template <nowiki>{{</nowiki>Disambig<nowiki>}}</nowiki> when the only titles to disambiguate are '''non-place-names''', such as tribes, languages, or other non-geographical topics.
*Use both templates when the similar titles are mixed place-names and non-place-names.


===== Template position  =====
I suggest that this page be linked to the general help and editing pages for the Wiki. I note that there is the navbox at the bottom of the page but I suggest that there be a link to an appropriate page at the top. Also I don't see that this page has ever been categorized.


'''''When adding a''''' '''single''' '''''template:'''''
[[User:Jamestanner|James L. Tanner]] 13:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


*If the disambiguation page list takes less than 3/4th of a screen top to bottom, position the template at the bottom.
== Referencing Guidelines  ==
*If the list takes more than 3/4th of a screen, position the template at the top.


'''''If adding''''' '''both''' '''''templates:''''' position the <nowiki>{{</nowiki>Geodis<nowiki>}}</nowiki> template at the top, and position the <nowiki>{{</nowiki>Disambig<nowiki>}}</nowiki> template at the bottom of the screen.  
One of the major sections of all publishing manuals of style is how to reference specific types of information. This Manual of Style does not includie such guidance. Is this because of a conscious decision not to include these guidelines, or an unintentional oversight? Including this information standarizes the references, but more importantly, it gives greater assurance that the reference can be found, despite URL chages, and it gives credit to the creater of the information as well as the person or web site that is hosting the information.  


:Instead of adding both templates to the page, what if we create a new template that incorporates both the "Geodis" and "Disambig" templates into one single template? [[User:Franjensen|Franjensen]] 15:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
[[User:Klk3|Klk3]] 20:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)<br>


For a prime example of an actual disambiguation page, see [[Alabama (disambiguation)]].  
== Missing information in section 4.3  ==


[[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 15:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
The following catagory has missing information:  


There is a problem with using both templates, especially when the list is longer than the monitor and no one know there is an article about something or other use. See [[Kent (disambiguation)|Kent]] [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 17:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Naming subheadings within articles


= Interactive maps and lists of sub-divisions  =
Organizing information. In an article, subheadings or sections should be used to organize the content and keep similar information together. Subheadings should help users scan an article to find the information they need.


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)
Guidelines for subheadings/section titles. '''Use the guidelines for article titles with the following differences.'''


= Indirect Link or Direct Link  =
The following differences information (the sentence above in bold) &nbsp;is not listed in the article.


Go to [[New York City, New York|New York City, New York]] and scroll down to "Websites". See the 2nd item, "New York Genealogy"<br>
<br>  


We have a problem - you will not know until you get there, half of sites are paid subscription only.&nbsp; Take a look at the contributor's list - [https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/Special:Contributions/Jeniannj Special:Contributions/Jeniannj] Every one of them has the identical problem.  
Also under the catagory: Linking through the use of page section templates, '''Other possible templates to create include:&nbsp;&nbsp;''' there are two red templates -either broken links or no content in those links.&nbsp; Need to fix links or add content.  


Ancestry Ancestry Ancestry Ancestry Ancestry
<br>


Every one requires paid subscription. You try, and get the message you have to have paid subscription to access.
Thanks


Wouldn't it be more honest to have direct link with the standard Access Code we use?
[[:Category:Featured Article Committee members|Featured Article Committee members]] –


Forwarded from message from Ritchey: The question may be "To link or not to link to a directory of paid sites?" In this case the question is even more interesting because the directory itself doesn't make clear which pages it links to are fee-based.
:It appears that this section was started and not finished by [[User:WilliamsDa|Darris]]. Looking back in the page history I found that this [https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/index.php?title=FamilySearch_Wiki:Manual_of_Style&diff=prev&oldid=660838 section was added on 18 June 2011]. I have added a {{tl|ToDo}} template as a reminder that it is incomplete. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 16:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


"To link or not to link to a directory of paid sites?" is not quite the right question
<br>


My reply to him: Rather it is "whether to link to a directory of sites that is not clear as to which site requires paid access or not", whether to bypass and link direct to the sites themselves or not, be mindful some of these sites are already direct-linked. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 17:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
=== How to Describe an Area  ===


= Wiki - is it intended to be Mormon-oriented or is it intended to be all encompassing?  =
I suppose you are going to discuss this, but just in case you don't, I'll bring it up. Please give some thought to how to describe an area. A perfect example might be Harmony, PA, which exists in documents, but not on the ground. I think Oakland is the closest town with a current name. Also areas were located in territories that are now states; counties are divided and the names are changed, etc. Do we give it the current name so that people can find it or give it the name and location so people can find it in documents?I suppose you are going to discuss this, but just in case you don't, I'll bring it up. Please give some thought to how to describe an area. A perfect example might be Harmony, PA, which exists in documents, but not on the ground. I think Oakland is the closest town with a current name. Also areas were located in territories that are now states; counties are divided and the names are changed, etc. Do we give it the current name so that people can find it or give it the name and location so people can find it in documents? <span style="font-size:90%;">— Preceding [[FamilySearch Wiki:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:User name| Fillmore13 ]] ([[User talk:User name|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/ user name|contribs]])  02:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC) </span><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


Objection had been posted concerning Baltimore, Maryland vs Baltimore (Independent City), Maryland.
<br> '''Plural possession'''


Didn't we discuss the emphasis on reaching out to more places rather than emphasis on FHL Catalog? Many places do not recognize Baltimore (Independent City), Maryland. It is simply Baltimore, Maryland.  
When a word is showing possession and would normally have an apostrophe s ('s) at the end of the word, but that word is also plural or the word already ends in s, then the word would normally end in s'. There is no plural possessive that ends in s apostrophe s (s's). [Maybe this sentence should be first in the explanation. I do not have a Chicago Manual, but the MLA Handbook, Sixth Edition shows this under the area of Punctuation - Apostrophe. 3.2.7b. Feel free to reword the explanation.]


What's more Wikipedia mentions "Independent City" only in the article, same is true for the independent cities of Virginia as well as United Kingdom. The key is the simplicity of remembering the place names. Only in Family History Library Catalog you will find that term. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 00:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Correct: The ancestors' graves were not marked.  


:I like simplicity. But sometimes simplicity all by itself isn't enough. Another important characterisitic is verifiable. Using a standard like "do it the way the FHL catalog does it" on place names gives us a standard that can be verified in most cases we would need, and predictable in the few cases that are not already in the catalog. If the only standard is simplicity by itself, that is harder to verify and predict what the concensus of users would agree is simple.
Incorrect: The ancestors's graves were not marked.  


:The logic behind the FHL Catalog standard should not be rejected just because it is associated with a "Mormon" organization. It is available to our Wiki community worldwide on the Internet and is specifically designed to help genealogists. Wikipedia has more of a general encyclopedia audience--it's standards, particularly on place names can be a useful guide, but the FHL Catalog has decades of thought and experience behind it and is more adapted to the needs of genealogists.
Thanks, Darlene ([[User:Hunt4roots|Password]] 18:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)) <br>


:'''How do we title articles about towns?''' If our community reaches concensus that the FHL Catalog is a good standard to use for naming articles about places, I believe that would mean that&nbsp;articles about cities and towns like Chicago would carry the title '''''Chicago, Cook, Illinois''''', or '''''Fairfield, Jefferson, Iowa'''''. How does the community feel about this? If I understand what Dsammy is saying, he would prefer the more simple '''''Chicago, Illinois''''' or '''''Fairfield, Iowa'''''. What do our other contributors think? [[User:Diltsgd|Diltsgd]] 02:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
=== Link to Church style guide ===
::Take a look at [[Fairfield (disambiguation)|Fairfield (disambiguation)]]. It already distinguish several Fairfield's in one state. I am referring to usage of "independent city" in the url address.
The link to the style guide needs to be https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/style-guide
::And this format is already widespread in several Wiki sites. If more than one is found in a specific area, just add the necessary identification like Fairfield, Hyde County, North Carolina and Fairfield, Union County, North Carolina. It's worse with Washington Townships so additional identification is necessary as needed and just for Iowa alone, there are 49 of them!)<br>What's more I can shoot down your assumption, in the Family History Library Catalog, you can't get "Chicago" with "Cook County", and instead of that it has to be either simply Chicago or Chicago with Illinois to get the search results. That is the logic behind the usage. The family historians are not going to type Fairfield, Jefferson, Iowa to get that because that part of information is already in the first line in the page in search results. Here's the result from search for "Fairfield, Utah" - Fairfield, Utah ... ed States]] &gt; [[Utah|Utah]] &gt; [[Utah County, Utah|Utah County]] &gt; Fairfield''... own in Utah County, Utah. For other uses, see [[Fairfield (disambiguation)|Fairfield (disambiguation)]]. '''' See how the info is presented instantly?<br>Secondly, why should it has to be to that way? You need to think OUTSIDE of the box to see how others see it. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 03:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
[[User:RaymondRS|RaymondRS]] ([[User talk:RaymondRS|talk]]) 10:58, 3 June 2021 (MDT)
::And I am going to have more fun with you. Check out [[Portland (disambiguation)|Portland (disambiguation)]]. And we are moving beyond what the FHL Catalog is into new areas not available at the FHL. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 04:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:44, 20 December 2022

This is the place for discussing stylistic details that affect many pages on the wiki. It covers mostly content changes that affect collections of wiki pages, whereas stylistic issues regarding the user interface, or general look and feel of the site, can be found elsewhere. 

This page covers two kinds of stylistic ideas: 

  1. Ideas that have reached a consensus among the FamilySearch Wiki community and can thus be executed over many pages. 
  2. Ideas that have been proposed and need further discussion and consensus before implementation. (These ideas cannot be implemented over many pages until they have achieved a consensus decision.)

If you have an idea to add to the Manual of Style (MOS), see Transforming a Style Idea to a Manual of Style Guideline, and then add your topic to Proposals being discussed section below.

Issues that have reached a consensus decision[edit source]

Proposals being discussed[edit source]

  1. Table of Contents: To Hide or Display by Default
  2. FamilySearch Wiki:Separator for Items in See Also Section
  3. Buttons
  4. Access Codes (how to designate whether a linked site is free or fee-based)
  5. Breadcrumb Trails
  6. Changing the Font Size and Color of Heading 1
  7. Adding References or Links to Books for Sale
  8. FamilySearch Wiki Talk:Consensus
  9. FamilySearch Wiki Talk:Source Citation Formats
  10. Linking to works in the FamilySearch Catalog (FS Catalog) and Worldcat (OCLC)
  11. Naming Conventions for Geographic Names
  12. Disambiguation
  13. Interactive Maps and Lists of Sub-divisions
  14. Linking to Directory Sites Whose External Links to Paid Sites are Ambiguous
  15. "Names, Personal" versus "Names Personal"
  16. "Language and Languages" versus "Languages"
  17. Localities template to replace populated places section
  18. Infobox template
  19. Wpd (Wikipedia) template
  20. Linking 
  21. Spelling in the English-language wiki
  22. Naming a project
  23. Web sites or websites

What to do with Help:Naming Conventions?[edit source]

Help:Naming conventions was created before we had the Manual of Style. It was also created "back in the day" when we discussed stylistic items in User Group meeting (Community Meeting) to reach consensus. Since Help:Naming Conventions deals with style more than instructions, I'm thinking it should be added to the FamilySearch Wiki namespace. I also wonder which (if any) of the conventions on Help:Naming Conventions deserves to be added to the Manual of Style or this discussion page. Ritcheymt 04:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I support the proposal to move Help:Naming conventions to the FamilySearch Wiki namespace. --Steve 09:25, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I also support the move and have added a discussion item to the page itself and also the "Move" template on the page. --Fran 18:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Guidelines for large projects[edit source]

It would be helpful to have some guidelines established for large projects, such as the pages created for US state or county pages. I'm thinking specifically of the England probate registers project that includes a page for each of the 40 counties. It's user-friendly to have the same "look and feel", including the heading and subheading styles. Anne 18:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

A Place to Start[edit source]

I think it would be easiest to piggyback of what other wikis have done. People who begin contributing may already be used to these conventions. For example, the Wikipedia Manual of Style gives some great ideas on what our conventions should be. Perhaps we lift from there and then change things as it becomes necessary to do so. --Gregorybean 02:16, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Links[edit source]

What ever happened to format for the displayed text for links? If I remember correctly, "Click here to . . ." was considered an incorrect way to format them. I believe Create an external link talks about this subject. Thomas_Lerman 12:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Integration and links to other subjects[edit source]

I suggest that this page be linked to the general help and editing pages for the Wiki. I note that there is the navbox at the bottom of the page but I suggest that there be a link to an appropriate page at the top. Also I don't see that this page has ever been categorized.

James L. Tanner 13:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Referencing Guidelines[edit source]

One of the major sections of all publishing manuals of style is how to reference specific types of information. This Manual of Style does not includie such guidance. Is this because of a conscious decision not to include these guidelines, or an unintentional oversight? Including this information standarizes the references, but more importantly, it gives greater assurance that the reference can be found, despite URL chages, and it gives credit to the creater of the information as well as the person or web site that is hosting the information.

Klk3 20:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Missing information in section 4.3[edit source]

The following catagory has missing information:

Naming subheadings within articles

Organizing information. In an article, subheadings or sections should be used to organize the content and keep similar information together. Subheadings should help users scan an article to find the information they need.

Guidelines for subheadings/section titles. Use the guidelines for article titles with the following differences.

The following differences information (the sentence above in bold)  is not listed in the article.


Also under the catagory: Linking through the use of page section templates, Other possible templates to create include:   there are two red templates -either broken links or no content in those links.  Need to fix links or add content.


Thanks

Featured Article Committee members –

It appears that this section was started and not finished by Darris. Looking back in the page history I found that this section was added on 18 June 2011. I have added a {{ToDo}} template as a reminder that it is incomplete. --Steve (talk| contribs) 16:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


How to Describe an Area[edit source]

I suppose you are going to discuss this, but just in case you don't, I'll bring it up. Please give some thought to how to describe an area. A perfect example might be Harmony, PA, which exists in documents, but not on the ground. I think Oakland is the closest town with a current name. Also areas were located in territories that are now states; counties are divided and the names are changed, etc. Do we give it the current name so that people can find it or give it the name and location so people can find it in documents?I suppose you are going to discuss this, but just in case you don't, I'll bring it up. Please give some thought to how to describe an area. A perfect example might be Harmony, PA, which exists in documents, but not on the ground. I think Oakland is the closest town with a current name. Also areas were located in territories that are now states; counties are divided and the names are changed, etc. Do we give it the current name so that people can find it or give it the name and location so people can find it in documents? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fillmore13 (talk | contribs) 02:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


Plural possession

When a word is showing possession and would normally have an apostrophe s ('s) at the end of the word, but that word is also plural or the word already ends in s, then the word would normally end in s'. There is no plural possessive that ends in s apostrophe s (s's). [Maybe this sentence should be first in the explanation. I do not have a Chicago Manual, but the MLA Handbook, Sixth Edition shows this under the area of Punctuation - Apostrophe. 3.2.7b. Feel free to reword the explanation.]

Correct: The ancestors' graves were not marked.

Incorrect: The ancestors's graves were not marked.

Thanks, Darlene (Password 18:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC))

Link to Church style guide[edit source]

The link to the style guide needs to be https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/style-guide RaymondRS (talk) 10:58, 3 June 2021 (MDT)

Retrieved from "https://integration-ru.familysearch.org/en/wiki/index.php?title=FamilySearch_Wiki_talk:Manual_of_Style&oldid=5179292"