4,497
edits
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style: Difference between revisions
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Manual of Style (view source)
Revision as of 13:33, 28 May 2009
, 28 May 2009Added some votes to the table re. History heading
(moved a part of the History vs. Local Histories discussion into the discussion (it was fragged at the end of the page)) |
(Added some votes to the table re. History heading) |
||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
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) | ||
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) | ||
| Line 113: | Line 113: | ||
| | | | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |||
| Alan | |||
| X | |||
| | |||
| | |||
|- | |||
| Anne | |||
| X | |||
| | |||
| | |||
|- | |||
| Batsondl | |||
| X | |||
| | |||
| | |||
|} | |} | ||