4,497
edits
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style: Difference between revisions
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style (view source)
Revision as of 15:23, 26 May 2009
, 26 May 2009added discussion: What is consensus?
(→"Local Histories" or "Histories" heading on county pages?: add opinion) |
(added discussion: What is consensus?) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
== What is consensus? == | |||
In order for an item to migrate from a Manual of Style discussion to a Manual of Style guideline, it needs to have reached consensus with the community. But what is consensus? Wikipedians say it is not unanimity. But what is it? A 60-40 vote? a 70-30 vote? 80-20? What kind of majority does an issue need to show in order to have reached consensus? Possibly, as Jbparker said, we don't have to worry so much about getting a huge majority on an issue because what we're making with the Manual of Style isn't policies, but guidelines. They're like strong recommendations. If someone doesn't want to follow them, they aren't compelled to do so. So community, '''what is consensus?''' [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
== "Local Histories" or "Histories" heading on county pages? == | == "Local Histories" or "Histories" heading on county pages? == | ||
| Line 69: | Line 73: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Familyjournals | | Familyjournals | ||
| | | | ||
| X | | X | ||
| I am for local histories | | I am for local histories | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 127: | Line 131: | ||
[[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC) | [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 12:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
I agree with the Chicago Manual of Style, due to wide recognition/acceptance. | I agree with the Chicago Manual of Style, due to wide recognition/acceptance. | ||
| Line 135: | Line 139: | ||
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) | 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) | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
I may be missing something obvious, but why direct wiki readers to the FHL for a book? What percentage of wiki users would have access to the FHL book collection in SLC (since the FHL doesn't loan, right?). 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) | I may be missing something obvious, but why direct wiki readers to the FHL for a book? What percentage of wiki users would have access to the FHL book collection in SLC (since the FHL doesn't loan, right?). 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) | ||
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) | 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) | ||
== MOS is guidelines hopefully, not policies == | == MOS is guidelines hopefully, not policies == | ||
| Line 219: | Line 223: | ||
= '''Naming conventions (geographic names)''' = | = '''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 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 260: | Line 264: | ||
= '''Wiki:Disambiguation''' = | = '''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. | | '''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 298: | Line 302: | ||
== 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 366: | Line 370: | ||
= Indirect Link or Direct Link = | = Indirect Link or Direct Link = | ||
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> | 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> | ||
We have a problem - you will not know until you get there, half of sites are paid subscription only. 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. | We have a problem - you will not know until you get there, half of sites are paid subscription only. 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. | ||
| Line 384: | Line 388: | ||
== Topics History vs Local Histories == | == Topics History vs Local Histories == | ||
It's better to have the topic History. Local histories can be a subset. I looked at a few research outlines for History. Most only have a list of dates and what happened to affect history in the area. Some list a local history or two but they are put at the end of the dates. The list we currently use in Wiki are the FHLC topics. These are our high-level topics. We allowed adding topics instead of subsets, we will "open the door" for any other topic, such as Marriage Records as its own topic instead of a subset of Church Records or NARA as its own instead of Archives and Libraries. If the majority don't care if there is a ''lengthy'' list of topics - perhaps dozens - on the home page then I won't protest. But, I prefer to have only History as the topic. [[User:Anne|Anne]] 13:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)<br> <br> | It's better to have the topic History. Local histories can be a subset. I looked at a few research outlines for History. Most only have a list of dates and what happened to affect history in the area. Some list a local history or two but they are put at the end of the dates. The list we currently use in Wiki are the FHLC topics. These are our high-level topics. We allowed adding topics instead of subsets, we will "open the door" for any other topic, such as Marriage Records as its own topic instead of a subset of Church Records or NARA as its own instead of Archives and Libraries. If the majority don't care if there is a ''lengthy'' list of topics - perhaps dozens - on the home page then I won't protest. But, I prefer to have only History as the topic. [[User:Anne|Anne]] 13:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)<br><br> | ||
:I'm all for using History instead of Local Histories. Simple is important and we want people to easily access the information. [[User:Batsondl|Batsondl]] 15:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC) | :I'm all for using History instead of Local Histories. Simple is important and we want people to easily access the information. [[User:Batsondl|Batsondl]] 15:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC) | ||