4,497
edits
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style: Difference between revisions
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style (view source)
Revision as of 15:03, 21 May 2009
, 21 May 2009added break
(smithing) |
(added break) |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
:I don't see us moving to limit topics to a single word, so I don't think "History" or "Histories" has an advantage over "Local Histories" in terms of length. But I don't think using a cross reference in this case works well either. If we wanted to create a cross reference at "History" to guide users to "Local Histories" or "Local History," the cross reference/link would be a heading. I think making a heading into a cross reference link feels clunky. It'd be okay if it was an index entry we were talking about, but headings are generally used to aid readability in an article, and I don't think it aids readability to direct someone's eye to a heading only to find that it's merely a cross-reference. So I'm being swayed by others' comments -- I'm being converted to the "History" camp and away from the mindset that we need two headings/articles (a history-of-the-place-as-it-pertains-to-genealogy heading/page and a links-to-histories-of-this-place heading/page. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 20:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC) | :I don't see us moving to limit topics to a single word, so I don't think "History" or "Histories" has an advantage over "Local Histories" in terms of length. But I don't think using a cross reference in this case works well either. If we wanted to create a cross reference at "History" to guide users to "Local Histories" or "Local History," the cross reference/link would be a heading. I think making a heading into a cross reference link feels clunky. It'd be okay if it was an index entry we were talking about, but headings are generally used to aid readability in an article, and I don't think it aids readability to direct someone's eye to a heading only to find that it's merely a cross-reference. So I'm being swayed by others' comments -- I'm being converted to the "History" camp and away from the mindset that we need two headings/articles (a history-of-the-place-as-it-pertains-to-genealogy heading/page and a links-to-histories-of-this-place heading/page. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 20:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
So people, correct me if I'm wrong. I see the following results from this discussion. Please correct your entry in this table if I've read you wrong. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC) | So people, correct me if I'm wrong. I see the following results from this discussion. Please correct your entry in this table if I've read you wrong. [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
{| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" width="100%" border="1" | {| cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" width="100%" border="1" | ||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
| [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC) | | [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Dsammy | | Dsammy | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Diltsgt | | Diltsgt | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Thomas_Lerman | | Thomas_Lerman | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Franjensen | | Franjensen | ||
| | | | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
| Bakerbh | | Bakerbh | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Familyjournals | | Familyjournals | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| JbParker | | JbParker | ||
| | | | ||
| X | | X | ||
| | | | ||
|} | |} | ||
<br> | |||
== Turabian? Shown Mills? Chigago? Oh my! == | == Turabian? Shown Mills? Chigago? Oh my! == | ||