1130:) also look good. Before this, I sometimes had the feeling that the verticle density of text in articles is sometimes quite low. I even have the feeling that increasing it where applicable is quite encyclopaedic. And technology will support this even better and better in the future as certainly the quality of display hardware will increase in the future. So we would be on the right track. On the other hand, I would put non-list content, especially whole sections in traditional style articles only with caution in sections. But I would not revert it if I see that and think it fits. Just Let the community decide per article. After all, it is a nice idea. ā
1928:"defer to the most common usage"? The most common usage for personal names is for them to begin with a capital letter, even if certain individuals prefer to not do so. It seems then (for me at least) that going along with such nonstandard usage shows a certain lack of seriousness as well as a bit of "suck-uppery," because (again for me) the article writers have not shown a certain distance from blatant personal idiosyncrasies. For other cases, such as eBay, there seems to be a difficult situation, because eBay is a trademark, and therefore according to this very style manual should be capitalized in all instances.
811:
traditional units of time day, month, and year are not SI units, but they are used in the scientific literature, and a similar internationalizing principle applies, and the (highly western-centric) internationalizing principle is the Latin language, wherein the units in question are diem, mensem, and annum. We
English speakers don't notice the abbreviations d and m as not-English, but a(nnnum) sticks out to us. Other languages suffer even greater mismatch between the international abbreviations and the local names, and use the abbreviations anyway. For example, the German wikipedia, in the entry
1208:). As mentioned before, it often depends on the resolution of the monitors or device & the default text size in the browser. When I design web pages w/ tables and columns, I always evaluate it with several different base font sizes larger and smaller than my own. I these equate it to "over-engineering": Going too far to optimize (the use of space) for your-own browser environment often has unintended consequences. Unless you can be sure that features like columns are benign for every viewer, I think it's safer to keep it simple.
348:
the word "god" is trickier for me, because it can be both a proper name (and therefore capitalizable) or just a noun (and therefore lowercase). I'd be inclined to not capitalize in the sentence "Is there a god?" but would capitalize in the ever-so-slightly different sentence "Does God exist?". The gender issue is interesting. English really needs a good neuter third person that's not "it" (and a good second person plural that's not "ya'll").
31:
517:"Latinly", and "Spanishly" literate, it takes me about 15 seconds to figure out what that freaking a is doing there - if I get it at all. I think use of seconds & hours should be encouraged & use of the indeterminate year be avoided. If year has to be used, I see no reason why it cannot be spelled out - not being an SI unit & being of indeterminate length, there will never be an official symbol for it anyway --
1518:
to the title words. I see no reason to change a long-standing directive just because there are many articles that do not follow it. It is common to see non-proper nouns capitalized in sub-headings, too, should we abandon the attempt to have uniformity in sub-headings, or should we apply the directive? I do not think that this debate is over, and wonder if others agree with me. If not, I'll stand down.
1863:
this logic should eBay be changed to EBay? And if so, when? at the beginning of a sentence? or always? Also what of personal preference, like people like (I think) k. d. lang? Should all references to this person be reworked to normal usage (i.e. K. D. Lang) or not? Or only at the beginning of a sentence?
1945:
It is true that both these examples are very strange; I don't think you'd expect them to pop up in a manual of style, to be honest. If there is really such a war on beginning a sentence with eBay, find a way to reword the sentence so that a normal word starts it; in other cases eBay should be spelt
1517:
used again early in the article. There is nothing in the Manual to say that these words have to be linked in the first sentence or even in the first paragraph. I think that as long as the words re-appear and are linked in the first two paragraphs, the reader has ample opportunity to follow the links
1348:
Figures rarely need to be given to more than 3 significant figures ā you are unlikely to need such precision, and measurements are seldom accurate enough to justify it. Common exceptions include money (where $ 24,495 is a perfectly acceptable figure) and numbers beginning with the figure 1: it would
977:
I'm a bit concerned about this. I agree that columns look better under ideal circumstances, but there are a couple of potential problems. As
Shimmin notes, it makes the articles a bit harder to edit and maintaināa newbie might have trouble with the column code, even with the templates. The breaks
191:
was talking about not capitalizing personal pronouns that refer to the
Christian god (i.e. He vs he), rather than not capitalizing the word "god" when it's being used as a proper noun to refer to a particular god (which would go against the English convention of always capitalizing proper nouns.) In
150:
But even if a majority of wikipedia readers DID prefer capitalizing pronouns that refer to the christian god, would that really be the deciding point? For me, such a capitalization is tantamount to proclaiming the christian god is the One True God, which is POV, regardless of what percentage of the
1440:
Why has the directive against links in the title (in the opening sentence) been removed? That's been established style for a long time, and I haven't seen some great upwell of protest against it. Occasionally one needs to make an exception, but that's true of most of our rules. I'd like to see that
1023:
Remember that
Knowledge (XXG) is still an encyclopedia, and it should be printable - by that I mean it would look okay in print... it's hard to explain I guess... But anyway, I really think this should be discouraged. That said, I don't intend to propose that it be discouraged, unless someone else
347:
Wow-- such really good points. I completely agree, Eloil, about the capitalization of "He" is appropriate if quoting another writer who used that case. It's interesting to imagine what to do if quoting not a writer but a SPEAKER-- though I can't expect that one to come up. Whether to capitalize
113:
I think that the rules of respect of each religion should be obeyed whenever possible. In particular, the
Christian rule of capitalizing words referring to God. I don't think that this conflicts with any Knowledge (XXG) principle such as the NPOV, and while I am a Christian myself, I wouldn't mind
1862:
I may have been looking in all the wrong places, but there doesn't seem to any section of the style manual about the uses of capital letters for some of the more esoteric examples. For example, eBay. It states in the trademark section that REALTOR should be considered
Realtor, and so, according to
1367:
Drop trailing zeros in most cases, ie use 18.3m rather than 18.30m, and 23m rather than 23.0m ā unless: ā¢ you are differentiating between similar numbers, eg use āthe trailer is 4.0m high, 200mm lower than the old 4.2m standardā. Or: ā¢ you have a group or table of figures with similar formats, eg
1340:
First, a word about significant figures (sf) and decimal places (dp): the precision of a number is denoted by the number of significant figures it contains, not necessarily the number of decimal places. For example, a length measurement of 30.8mm (to 1 decimal place) can also be rendered as 3.08cm
395:
is a very common unit in the field of chemical industry, which is what the value of 2 Mt/a is about. For smaller amounts, such as production plant capacity also often kt/a or (worse) ktpa are very common abbreviations. You'll see the Mt/a use also in several other articles which include data about
1353:
With all due respect, this doesn't make any sense to me. If I have a precise measurement, why should I round it? It would be short-sighted to impose such a restrictive and wide-ranging rule. Besides, what's so special about digit "1"? Is it not equally absurd to turn a measurement such as 2.004Ā m
810:
Scientific units can have different names in different languages, or even dialects of the same language, but the abbreviations are internationalized. Hence SI doesn't care that
Americans call it a 'meter' and the British call it a 'metre', but does insist that everyone abbreviate it m. Now, the
139:
I strongly disagree with Jorge. We should write in a style that as many readers as possible will understand, follow and (if possible) like. This is not necessarily the style that experts or those familiar with a particular subject will use - we should put our readers first. We show respect to our
516:
In
English "Y" is much more commonly used, as in Y2K, YTD, YYYY - and I am sure others could provide many other examples. Years are not SI units anyway and they do not have a definite length, so all usage of it has to be a rough approximation. Every time I see it - and I am quite scientifically,
321:
The relevant source literature always refers to Yahweh, and Allah as masculine; and except for a few very recent and deliberate projects, the same is also true of "God." The relevant source literature also always refers to Thor and Zeus as masculine. The urge to make the sex (or "gender" if you
1927:
I guess my question here is more theoretical than practical. Very few people will die if from time to time a sentence does not begin with a capital letter or if certain symbols make their way into a context that generally precludes them. I guess my question is what exactly does on mean when one
1027:
In the meantime, it is perfectly fair to revert any such changes because there is an unwritten convention columns are not used like that. So, if a guideline is to be made, it should reflect that (this convention is beyond doubt ā other proposals are debatable; with this, I've never before seen
953:
I don't really perceive this change in layout as earth-shaking. Long lists of short lines do look better in columns, and I've seen that approach taken in "List of..." articles before. It runs into troubles if the lists are liable to dramatic changes in length, and the column breaks need to be
1616:
No explicit exceptions please. I believe it's six against one. 'Certain complex titles or verbose leads' is IMHO unclear and the other qualifications do not call for an exception. Links in the titles are downright ugly and do not add value. You have not convinced me that we need these specific
1648:
wikilink adds value. Moreover, I'd prefer something that may or not be (to you) aesthetic to a larger, more problematic issue of having a tautology or redundancy through unnecessary repetition. I realise mine is not a majority position, but I reiterate the inappropriateness of including an
1491:
I might have been the culprit of this; if so, I apologise. I think if this directive is to be restored, it should not be unequivocal and modified to account for exceptions: I've noticed numerous article leads that are so wikified ... and effectively. And these despite the inclusion of this
1666:
upfront assertions in the manual regarding elasticity and "perfection." In summary: unequivocal, unenforceable guidelines (that are not Wp policy) despite reality will undoubtedly not lead to conformity in Wp style. As such, this may lead to the Manual of Style being treated with some (or
164:
Do you think that the various news organisations, being neutral at least in name, should avoid capitalising "God" so as to avoid any seeming bias in favour of
Christianity? It is my contention that rules and guidelines generally followed by the news media are no less applicable to Knowledge
622:
The question was brought up as regards annual production of industrial chemicals. In the industrial news publications I'm familiar with, Mt/a is the usual abbreviation, or it is spelled out "million metric tons annually." As long as there is an explanatory note with the first use of the
1946:
like so (I believe that is its most common usage). With names, if most people capitalise the name in question then do so too, regardless of the preferences of the individual him/herself. Remember that the manual is not intended to be concrete; exceptions will arise from time to time.
1275:
I would suggest that, for example, "50 metres" should be expressed as "50m" rather than "50 m". If using an abbreviated unit, it almost always looks better to close up the number and unit (note that bar - the unit of pressure - is not an abbreviation, and thus should not be closed up).
322:
prefer) of the God of the monotheistic revealed religions ambiguous is a product of very recent and temporary
Western enthusiasms. God, Allah, Yahweh, and the like should remain masculine; to alter the sex of this or these deities is historically inaccurate revisionism.
1649:
unequivocal statement in such a document that (despite its existence) flies in the face of what some Wikipedians practice (i.e., not me alone) and does not allow for potential rare exception. And perhaps other qualifications require exceptions too?
1806:
1880:
I believe an appropriate guiding principle (though you may well not find it written anywhere, and other editors may disagree) is to defer to the most common usage when in doubt. The reason articles can't start with lowercase letters (e.g.
124:
So how do you propose, at the same time, to accommodate the rule in Judaism that would be violated by writing out the name of the deity in the way you just wrote it? (A practicing Jew in such a context would use a locution like "G-d"." --
1538:
allowing for uniformity and exceptions (i.e., used for articles that require it, particularly for terms/leads that are complex). Ditto (or should be) for caps in sub-headings. The introduction of the guide article is summative:
931:) has been implementing this format on a series of articles, but without discussion - which, for such a fundamental change to article formatting, I feel is necessary. For an example of what I am referring to, scroll to the end of
1176:
Tables should be used to mark up truly tabular information ("data tables"). Content developers should avoid using them to lay out pages ("layout tables"). Tables for any use also present special problems to users of screen
1543:
are meant for the average case, and must be applied with a certain degree of elasticity. . . . Writers are not required to follow all or any of these rules: the joy of wiki editing is that perfection is not
1057:
No, I don't think this is a good idea. Presentation and content should be as separate as possible, and while this may look good on high resolution screens it looks horrible at lower resolutions (like on
1344:
Generally, use the fewest possible digits and the fewest possible decimal places: 85.3m is preferable to 85,300mm or 0.0853km. You may want to break this rule to keep all the figures in the same units.
1222:
sections. There is nothing really new about that, and it makes sense it many circumstances, as with dot points. The "col tags" created by Zondor make doing such easier. Perhaps we should recommend
881:
for all organizms, not limited to bacteria. I have not payed particular attention, or noticed this is not being done in Knowledge (XXG), but the MoS states it is specific to bacteria. Comments?
280:
is considered by many to be a deity, but as a historical figure his gender is not seriously disputed (to my limited knowledge, anyway.) The idea of removing gendered pronouns from the articles on
1501:
Thank you! I would only recommend replacing 'verbose titles' (in the current version) with 'certain complex titles or verbose leads', or similar; if there are no objections ... thanks again!
623:
abbreviation (as there is in this case), Mt/a seems to fall into the category of units used for "historical or pragmatic reasons..." they are the standard unit in which the quantity is cited.
1182:
Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when linearized. Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an alternative equivalent (which may be a linearized version).
213:
Didn't think of this when I made my earlier comment, but what I said only applies to the article text, not quotes. I think changing "He" to "he" in a quote would also add inappropriate POV.
1627:
I reiterate my opposition to the proposed change. The need for an explicit exception isn't apparent, and would lead to confusion. Style guidelines should be clear and easy to maintain. -
1767:
1866:
Linked to this, but not really, is the use of logograms, like the symbol that Prince used to go by, or the plus signs in C++. Since the +'s are just a symbol standing in for the word
660:) would do in a pinch. We should ask ourselves, "what will visitors easily understand?" (as not all of them will be industrial engineers and chemists) and proceed on that basis.
1534:
Noted. An absolute directive means nothing if it is not adhered to, and the wikifying of words/terms in titles is not at all rare. And the current directive remains clear while
1088:
I could hack out some simple CSS styles to do it in specific circumstances if people want the option, but I'd really rather not have the layout forced on me by the use of tables.
1617:
exceptions, and why the generic "apply elasticity" rule does not suffice. A section well written would bring up any newly introduced concepts, and the editor should link there.
276:
I'd tend to agree with that as well in the cases you mentioned (God/Allah/Jehovah), but it opens up some questions as far as extending the idea to other deities. For example,
114:
to obey similar rules of other religions. Therefore, I propose this to be changed regarding the "Religions, deities, philosophies, doctrines and their adherents" policy.
1562:
I'd be perfectly glad to see the original rule restored without qualification; my rewording was intended to meet Anthony halfway. Whichever works for other people, but
1341:(2dp), 0.0308m (4dp) or even 0.0000308km (7dp). In every case, the number contains three significant figures, and the precision of the measurement has not changed.
981:
The otherāpotentially more seriousāproblem is for editors and readers working at lower resolution or in non-maximized windows. The columns (particularly under
192:
the case of pronouns referring to one particular god or another, I agree that capitalization smacks of POV (unless the pronoun begins the sentence, obviously.)
1364:
Round up rather than down ā ie 2.904m becomes 2.90m, while 2.905m becomes 2.91m (and in this case, beware of turning 2.904m into 2.9m ā see the next point).
97:
89:
84:
72:
67:
59:
1415:(e.g., 2.004 m) while another is not (e.g., 1.9 m), then a table should generally list each of these values (with a possible proviso about precision and
1824:
It says it doesn't matter whether you use single or double spaces in the markup, which is fine. Ā But using to "enforce" double spaces in the
1580:
Thanks; I think the current qualification is fine while still being clear (and as above). In any event, my apologies for initiating a 'powderkeg'.Ā :)
377:
I would welcome ISO, NIST, BIPM or other respectable references on this. The article 'Acetic acid' quoted 'Mt/a'. I changed it to 'Mt/year' but it was
1115:
1705:
Excuse me? There's no need for your sarcasm. This unofficial guideline doesn't address morality or legality, and your comment flies in the face of
1644:
explicit? An opposing viewpoint can be that the original stipulation didn't make sense and that need for exceptions is apparent. Judiciously used,
575:
521:
385:
1411:
support and concur with attempts to derive Wp standards around these concepts; however, everything must be assessed in context. If one figure is
238:
Ah yes. In that case (pronouns only), I agree fully. I might make the further argument that referring to the gender of God/Allah/Jehovah/etc. is
1148:) but not so that two different sections are next to each other. Section headers, and especially the edit links, don't look right when split.
787:
since it would be in sync with abbreviations used elsewhere. It seems odd to abbreviate only one term but not another. That's it for me!Ā :)
815:
has the expression "1 d = 24 h = 1440 min = 86400 s". In local terms, that would mean "1 Tag = 24 Stunden = 1440 Minuten = 86400 Sekunden"
360:
Looks like another problem that the template proposal for automatically rendering the various flavours of English (see above) could solve.
1041:
I didn't want to propose anything until I had an idea of what the community's feeling was on this. There's been no discussion until now.--
1781:
1763:
1390:
1292:
1424:
Also note that spaces are commonly used (particularly by scientists) when separating thousands in lieu of commas ... but I'm easy.Ā :)
1204:
I think it is generally a bad idea, particularly when there are list items in the columns that're forced onto 2 or 3 lines (such as on
435:
140:
subjects by reporting factual information in (as far as possible) an unbiased way, not by changing our language to accommodate them,
1114:
I like it and think that it should be left to editors judgement and community consensus per article. I've applied it for example in
47:
17:
1513:
I do not see the need for that equivocation. It is a rare circumstance where the words in the title that are to be linked are
1020:
sections can save some space, but what was on the John Howard page - sections side by side - disturbs the entire layout.
928:
1227:
1589:
No need to apologize for stimulating discussion. Discussion of the style manual can only lead to improvements in it.
1794:
template). I cannot find any discussion on the creation of this type of article in the discussion archives. Thanks/
1740:
38:
1897:, again with the goal of conforming to most common usage, even though you have to do some trickery with the link.
1759:
1135:
1001:) could end up quite narrow; it's the sort of thing that could make references rather difficult to read or use.
836:
Thanks for your note; agreed. I think we need to focus on what abbreviation will suffice for this non-SI unit,
1006:
1684:
Hey, I have an idea. A lot of people steal money, so let's realign the law to reality and make it legal, yes?
1119:
1968:
1906:
1744:
1714:
1668:
1603:
1581:
1551:
1502:
1493:
1425:
1386:
1288:
1248:
1097:
853:
788:
661:
610:
571:
For easy reading I think we should always use "year" without mentioning "a" or "y" at all (i.e. "Mt/year").
446:
242:
inherently POV. (I'm not a Bible scholar by any stretch, but who are we to say that a deity has a gender?)--
1378:
1280:
1131:
1084:
I can see the utility in some places, but I think this should be something left up to user preferences. I
728:
495:. If there are some English-speaking scientific communities using it, I would suggest adding this info to
1640:
Noted. Perhaps the current version can be pruned or clarified to the original edit by Jmabel and not be
1594:
1523:
1235:
1046:
969:
944:
1929:
1871:
589:
would do if there's doubt, this would appear odd in combination with SI or other abbreviations (e.g.,
1848:
1839:
1685:
1618:
1456:
1355:
1313:
1187:
If a table is used for layout, do not use any structural markup for the purpose of visual formatting.
1152:
903:
361:
1971:
1950:
1932:
1874:
1851:
1842:
1832:
1813:
1798:
1774:
1747:
1733:
1717:
1688:
1671:
1631:
1621:
1606:
1597:
1584:
1574:
1554:
1526:
1505:
1496:
1486:
1477:
1468:
1459:
1449:
1428:
1358:
1326:
1316:
1307:
1264:
1251:
1238:
1212:
1196:
1155:
1138:
1079:
1070:
1049:
1032:
1010:
972:
958:
947:
906:
885:
856:
819:
791:
758:
731:
664:
627:
613:
541:
510:
475:
412:
364:
352:
326:
292:
251:
217:
196:
174:
155:
144:
133:
118:
1419:). However, the recitation of a plethora of characters may be unwieldy for in-text references. ...
1002:
288:
seems to me a bit like overkill as well, although I don't know if I could say exactly why this is.
1628:
1483:
840:, in this English Knowledge (XXG). In any event, I would advocate for a logical abbreviation for
1900:
1382:
1284:
1091:
440:
1912:
1349:
be absurd to turn a measurement such as 1,002mm into 1.00m if you were comparing it with 998mm.
1103:
452:
1709:. Moreover, your comment implies that the proponent of this opposing viewpoint advocates for
1400:
882:
538:
397:
247:
170:
115:
964:
Yes, but placing actual "headered" sections into colums is a new idea, as far as I'm aware.--
644:
is acceptable; I think the topic, though, has mushroomed into one which concerns usage where
1590:
1571:
1519:
1446:
1231:
1205:
1042:
965:
940:
922:
755:
472:
409:
349:
188:
152:
130:
1885:) is purely technical, and it is still perfectly fine to write the link in lowercase (e.g.
1710:
1706:
852:(nnum) et al. in non-English wikipedias) based on common usage, precedent, and consensus.
1947:
1465:
1149:
1075:
I don't like it, apart from the mentioned problems, I just think it doesn't look as good.
1029:
900:
507:
1260:
I dislike the columns, and if they are done, they need to be done in css; not tables. ā
939:. I think guidelines are necessary - whether they discourage or encourage this format.--
1829:
1788:
1323:
1261:
1193:
1076:
995:
985:
707:
382:
1807:
Knowledge (XXG):Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Manual of Style (signpost articles)
1404:
1371:
Retain leading zeros, ie use 0.67m rather than .67m (but consider also using 670mm).
892:
1729:
Is there a specific example of an article where links in headings are a good idea?
1474:
1332:
The space is important as 50m often means 50 million whereas 50 m means 50 metres.
1304:
1301:
955:
816:
652:
might be ambiguous ... ISO standards notwithstanding. In any case, a wikilink (Mt/
624:
572:
244:
167:
1730:
1567:
1442:
1067:
918:
917:
What are your thoughts on the use of columns to position sections side-by-side?
751:
518:
323:
126:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1165:
1890:
1810:
1795:
1771:
1209:
1063:
936:
723:
504:
289:
214:
193:
1374:
Thousands are clearer if separated by commas, ie 7,500kg rather than 7500kg.
899:. Most Knowledge (XXG) articles that I come across follow the correct style.
1893:). As to the various symbols, I think your best bet is to do something like
1412:
1059:
471:
per year (Mt/a)' as first use of the abbreviation. Seems good enough to me.
401:
141:
1016:
I really think this isn't a good idea. Columns to list items (like links)
727:. Don't take me as an expert or anything; I'm just a college sophomore. --
434:). It would probably be very difficult to find out what unit "a" indicated
1916:
1658:
If that is the consensus, fine. However, I contend the edition actually
1416:
1145:
1123:
1107:
456:
423:
1218:
I think I agree with Violetriga's suggestion that columns be used only
430:? It would perhaps give Bobblewik something useful to link to (i.e. Mt/
1312:
Both "50m" and "50 m" are wrong. The correct form is "50 m".
701:
978:
have to be repositioned if the sections are substantially changed.
896:
713:
653:
484:
468:
392:
277:
717:, unless the context suggested that the quantity in question was
605:(which appear in both Oxford and Webster's dictionaries) ā e.g.,
492:
1886:
1882:
718:
657:
500:
487:
is common in German scientific literature, so it is included in
431:
427:
285:
281:
1144:
My opinion is that we should allow it within a section (as per
812:
550:"a" is ambiguous, it is also used for other non-SI units (e.g.
109:
Religions, deities, philosophies, doctrines and their adherents
695:
640:
When there is sufficient context (as in the initial example),
551:
25:
369:
1847:
Would you look at that, WP eats up the space automagically!
488:
406:
Quantities and Units, Part 1: Space and Time, ISO 31-1:1992
1271:
Suggested style for using abbreviated units of measurement
437:
if you didn't already have a very good idea from context.
496:
408:
suggests 'a' too, I find now after looking around a bit.
1870:, to what extent should articles humor uncommon usages?
564:
Most readers are not familiar with any abbreviation for
1127:
932:
378:
1713:. If you cannot comment or argue rationally, don't.
721:. Actually, in that case, I might have suspected the
374:
Is 'a' the best abbreviation for year as in 'Mt/a'?
1764:
Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style (signpost articles)
370:
Is 'a' the best abbreviation for year as in 'Mt/a'?
1907:
1098:
648:context or explanation is provided, in which case
585:, while common, is also ambiguous to many. While
537:A year is exactly 365.24 etc earth days. Exactly.
447:
530:is not a SI unit and does not have an exact value
1828:output (like Ā this) is definitely bad, right? ā
1302:http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/checklist.html
1739:One article, a featured one, I can think of is
1354:into 2.00Ā m if I'm comparing it with 1.996Ā m?
895:of any organism is italicised, but not higher
1399:Hello! I was hoping a salient discussion of
8:
873:In taxonomy it is standard to italicize the
779:In my earlier science classes, I always saw
467:The texts alluded to here all have 'million
557:Other abbreviation beside "a" are used for
1368:gear ratios: 3.67, 3.84, 4.00 and 4.25:1.
1838:I agree, generally it shouldn't be done.
1805:And added it to miscellany for deletion:
1116:List of object-oriented programming terms
783:used for year. I proposed the alternate
689:in scientific context. I would associate
396:the chemical commodity industry, such as
1322:But then the markup gets uglly.Ā :-) ā
681:This is interesting. I've always seen
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1122:where it fits nicely. The columns in
7:
18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style
711:. I would never have thought about
1667:additional) skepticism. Thanks!
24:
1662:the manual in-line with practice
1247:I concur with Violetriga and cj.
29:
1228:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to layout
869:Italics, and species references
1226:placing secions in columns in
422:Would this be worth noting at
1:
1775:17:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1527:23:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1506:15:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1497:01:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1487:00:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1478:23:52, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1469:23:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1460:22:28, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1450:06:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1429:01:39, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1359:22:27, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1317:22:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1308:22:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
1300:There has to be a space, see
1239:06:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
1213:19:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
1197:14:39, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
1156:10:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
1139:09:02, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
1080:16:33, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
1071:16:27, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
1050:11:39, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
1033:11:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
1011:06:05, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
973:04:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
959:14:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
948:14:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
907:09:06, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
886:01:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
665:03:57, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
628:03:46, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
614:03:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
576:21:52, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
522:06:37, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
511:00:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
476:23:12, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
413:23:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
386:23:06, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
365:18:52, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
353:09:00, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
327:05:42, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
293:04:32, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
252:23:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
218:06:44, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
197:06:14, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
175:05:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
156:20:54, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
145:18:05, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
134:17:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
119:03:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
1972:06:20, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
1951:05:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
1933:10:40, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
1875:23:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
1852:17:55, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1843:17:54, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1833:02:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1814:09:45, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1799:09:32, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1784:from the main MoS page (the
1748:01:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
1734:01:48, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
1718:01:46, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
1707:any assumption of good faith
1689:20:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
1672:13:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
1632:00:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
1622:21:14, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
1607:14:05, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
1598:21:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
1585:20:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
1575:19:47, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
1555:00:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
1327:22:52, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
1265:22:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
1252:19:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
857:19:47, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
820:00:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
792:06:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
759:06:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
732:04:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
542:16:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
1994:
1760:Category:Signpost articles
1741:Military history of Canada
1492:directive in this guide.
1407:would occur somewhere. I
1336:Precision in using numbers
1028:columns used like that.)
1768:Categories for deletion
1120:List of Petri net tools
750:I'd go for Mt/year. --
1566:needs to be there. --
891:The MoS is wrong. The
151:readership wants it.
1164:Please note that the
581:Hello! I agree that
42:of past discussions.
1780:I have also removed
1967:Makes sense to me.
1550:That's it for me.
1455:I'll sencond that.
913:Columns in articles
685:abbreviated with a
391:The use of 'a' for
1969:E Pluribus Anthony
1745:E Pluribus Anthony
1715:E Pluribus Anthony
1669:E Pluribus Anthony
1604:E Pluribus Anthony
1582:E Pluribus Anthony
1552:E Pluribus Anthony
1503:E Pluribus Anthony
1494:E Pluribus Anthony
1436:Links in the title
1426:E Pluribus Anthony
1401:significant digits
1249:E Pluribus Anthony
854:E Pluribus Anthony
789:E Pluribus Anthony
662:E Pluribus Anthony
611:E Pluribus Anthony
1782:Signpost articles
1754:Signpost articles
1395:
1381:comment added by
1297:
1283:comment added by
729:TantalumTelluride
398:hydrochloric acid
103:
102:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1985:
1920:
1919:
1909:
1903:
1896:
1793:
1787:
1394:
1375:
1296:
1277:
1111:
1110:
1100:
1094:
1000:
994:
990:
984:
460:
459:
449:
443:
189:User:Alecmconroy
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
1993:
1992:
1988:
1987:
1986:
1984:
1983:
1982:
1911:
1901:
1898:
1894:
1860:
1858:Capital letters
1849:PizzaMargherita
1840:PizzaMargherita
1822:
1791:
1785:
1756:
1686:PizzaMargherita
1619:PizzaMargherita
1457:PizzaMargherita
1438:
1376:
1356:PizzaMargherita
1338:
1314:PizzaMargherita
1278:
1273:
1206:Old Man's Child
1102:
1092:
1089:
998:
992:
988:
982:
915:
871:
451:
441:
438:
404:. External ref
372:
362:PizzaMargherita
324:Smerdis of Tlƶn
111:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1991:
1989:
1981:
1980:
1979:
1978:
1977:
1976:
1975:
1974:
1958:
1957:
1956:
1955:
1954:
1953:
1938:
1937:
1936:
1935:
1922:
1921:
1859:
1856:
1855:
1854:
1845:
1821:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1802:
1801:
1758:I have listed
1755:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1722:
1721:
1720:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1650:
1635:
1634:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1489:
1480:
1471:
1462:
1437:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1421:
1420:
1405:decimal places
1362:
1361:
1337:
1334:
1330:
1329:
1272:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1242:
1241:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1184:
1179:
1159:
1158:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1036:
1035:
1025:
1021:
1003:TenOfAllTrades
962:
961:
914:
911:
910:
909:
870:
867:
866:
865:
864:
863:
862:
861:
860:
859:
827:
826:
825:
824:
823:
822:
803:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
768:
767:
766:
765:
764:
763:
762:
761:
741:
740:
739:
738:
737:
736:
735:
734:
699:or a possibly
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
633:
632:
631:
630:
617:
616:
569:
568:
562:
555:
547:
546:
545:
544:
532:
531:
514:
513:
483:Using 'a' for
480:
479:
464:
463:
462:
461:
417:
416:
371:
368:
358:
357:
356:
355:
342:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
299:
298:
297:
296:
295:
263:
262:
261:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
227:
226:
225:
224:
223:
222:
221:
220:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
199:
180:
179:
178:
177:
159:
158:
137:
136:
110:
107:
105:
101:
100:
95:
92:
87:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1990:
1973:
1970:
1966:
1965:
1964:
1963:
1962:
1961:
1960:
1959:
1952:
1949:
1944:
1943:
1942:
1941:
1940:
1939:
1934:
1931:
1926:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1918:
1914:
1910:
1904:
1902:HorsePunchKid
1892:
1888:
1884:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1873:
1869:
1864:
1857:
1853:
1850:
1846:
1844:
1841:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1834:
1831:
1827:
1820:Double spaces
1819:
1815:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1803:
1800:
1797:
1790:
1783:
1779:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1773:
1769:
1765:
1761:
1753:
1749:
1746:
1742:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1732:
1719:
1716:
1712:
1708:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1697:
1690:
1687:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1679:
1678:
1673:
1670:
1665:
1661:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1654:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1636:
1633:
1630:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1620:
1608:
1605:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1596:
1592:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1583:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1556:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1540:
1537:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1525:
1521:
1516:
1507:
1504:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1495:
1490:
1488:
1485:
1481:
1479:
1476:
1472:
1470:
1467:
1463:
1461:
1458:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1448:
1444:
1441:restored. --
1435:
1430:
1427:
1423:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1402:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1393:) 28 Nov 2005
1392:
1388:
1384:
1383:194.201.25.22
1380:
1372:
1369:
1365:
1360:
1357:
1352:
1351:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1335:
1333:
1328:
1325:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1315:
1310:
1309:
1306:
1303:
1298:
1295:) 28 Nov 2005
1294:
1290:
1286:
1285:194.201.25.22
1282:
1270:
1266:
1263:
1259:
1258:
1253:
1250:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1240:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1211:
1207:
1198:
1195:
1192:
1188:
1185:
1183:
1180:
1178:
1174:
1173:
1171:
1169:
1168:accessibility
1163:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1157:
1154:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1112:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1095:
1093:HorsePunchKid
1087:
1082:
1081:
1078:
1073:
1072:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1051:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1034:
1031:
1026:
1022:
1019:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1004:
997:
987:
979:
975:
974:
971:
967:
960:
957:
952:
951:
950:
949:
946:
942:
938:
934:
930:
927:
924:
920:
912:
908:
905:
902:
898:
894:
893:binomial name
890:
889:
888:
887:
884:
880:
876:
868:
858:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
834:
833:
832:
831:
830:
829:
828:
821:
818:
814:
809:
808:
807:
806:
805:
804:
793:
790:
786:
782:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
760:
757:
753:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
733:
730:
726:
725:
720:
716:
715:
710:
709:
704:
703:
698:
697:
692:
688:
684:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
673:
666:
663:
659:
655:
651:
647:
643:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
629:
626:
621:
620:
619:
618:
615:
612:
608:
604:
603:
598:
597:
593:); how about
592:
588:
584:
580:
579:
578:
577:
574:
567:
563:
560:
556:
553:
549:
548:
543:
540:
536:
535:
534:
533:
529:
526:
525:
524:
523:
520:
512:
509:
506:
502:
498:
494:
490:
486:
482:
481:
477:
474:
473:Wim van Dorst
470:
466:
465:
458:
454:
450:
444:
442:HorsePunchKid
436:
433:
429:
425:
421:
420:
419:
418:
414:
411:
410:Wim van Dorst
407:
403:
399:
394:
390:
389:
388:
387:
384:
380:
375:
367:
366:
363:
354:
351:
346:
345:
344:
343:
328:
325:
320:
319:
318:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
307:
294:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
274:
273:
272:
271:
270:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
264:
253:
250:
249:
246:
241:
237:
236:
235:
234:
233:
232:
231:
230:
229:
228:
219:
216:
212:
211:
210:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
198:
195:
190:
186:
185:
184:
183:
182:
181:
176:
173:
172:
169:
163:
162:
161:
160:
157:
154:
149:
148:
147:
146:
143:
135:
132:
128:
123:
122:
121:
120:
117:
108:
106:
99:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1930:68.227.80.79
1872:68.227.80.79
1867:
1865:
1861:
1825:
1823:
1757:
1728:
1663:
1659:
1645:
1641:
1615:
1563:
1561:
1542:
1535:
1514:
1512:
1464:I concur. --
1439:
1408:
1373:
1370:
1366:
1363:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1331:
1311:
1299:
1274:
1223:
1219:
1203:
1186:
1181:
1175:
1167:
1113:
1085:
1083:
1074:
1056:
1017:
980:
976:
963:
937:this article
933:this article
925:
916:
883:SailorfromNH
878:
874:
872:
849:
848:in English;
845:
841:
837:
784:
780:
722:
712:
706:
700:
694:
690:
686:
682:
649:
646:insufficient
645:
641:
606:
601:
600:
595:
594:
590:
586:
582:
570:
565:
558:
527:
515:
405:
379:changed back
376:
373:
359:
243:
239:
166:
138:
112:
104:
78:
43:
37:
1591:Ground Zero
1520:Ground Zero
1377:āPreceding
1279:āPreceding
1150:violet/riga
1024:is with me.
954:re-placed.
350:Alecmconroy
153:Alecmconroy
36:This is an
1948:Neonumbers
1913:2005-12-03
1891:bell hooks
1711:incivility
1466:Coolcaesar
1403:(SDs) and
1170:guidelines
1104:2005-11-25
1066:devices).
1030:Neonumbers
901:Physchim62
724:attosecond
561:(e.g. "y")
453:2005-10-24
98:ArchiveĀ 40
90:ArchiveĀ 37
85:ArchiveĀ 36
79:ArchiveĀ 35
73:ArchiveĀ 34
68:ArchiveĀ 33
60:ArchiveĀ 30
1830:Omegatron
1809:. Thanks/
1770:. Thanks/
1564:something
1544:required.
1482:Me too. -
1473:I agree.
1324:Omegatron
1262:Omegatron
1194:Bobblewik
1128:permalink
1060:Pocket PC
383:Bobblewik
1915:05:46:40
1826:rendered
1417:accuracy
1391:contribs
1379:unsigned
1293:contribs
1281:unsigned
1146:Iraq War
1124:Iraq War
1106:21:21:56
929:contribs
708:Ƅngstrƶm
455:00:07:37
424:ISO 31-1
402:4,4'-MDI
187:I think
165:(XXG).--
1629:Willmcw
1602:TY.Ā :)
1484:Willmcw
1475:Cacycle
1413:precise
1305:Cacycle
1224:against
1177:readers
1172:state:
956:Shimmin
879:species
844:(e.g.,
817:Shimmin
625:Shimmin
591:Mt/year
573:Cacycle
539:Stevage
493:de:Jahr
39:archive
1731:Sortan
1660:brings
1568:Jmabel
1443:Jmabel
1220:within
1132:Adrian
1077:Martin
1068:Sortan
1018:within
919:Zondor
904:(talk)
813:de:Tag
752:Jmabel
702:ampere
656:or Mt/
519:JimWae
508:(talk)
469:tonnes
248:lawson
245:chris.
171:lawson
168:chris.
127:Jmabel
1811:wangi
1796:wangi
1789:Style
1772:wangi
1766:) on
1762:(see
1536:still
1409:fully
1210:Meegs
1086:think
996:col-4
986:col-3
875:Genus
714:annum
693:with
607:Mt/yr
505:Kusma
485:annus
393:annum
290:Eloil
278:Jesus
215:Eloil
194:Eloil
116:Jorge
16:<
1889:and
1887:eBay
1883:EBay
1868:plus
1572:Talk
1447:Talk
1387:talk
1289:talk
1236:talk
1166:W3C
1136:Talk
1118:and
1064:Palm
1047:talk
1007:talk
970:talk
945:talk
923:talk
897:taxa
877:and
842:year
838:year
756:Talk
719:time
683:year
587:year
566:year
559:year
528:Year
501:Year
499:and
491:and
489:de:A
428:year
400:and
286:Zeus
282:Thor
240:also
142:jguk
131:Talk
1664:and
1646:any
1515:not
1431:...
1230:.--
1153:(t)
1062:or
991:or
935:or
705:or
696:are
602:yr.
599:or
552:are
426:or
284:or
1792:}}
1786:{{
1743:.
1642:so
1593:|
1570:|
1522:|
1445:|
1389:ā¢
1291:ā¢
1234:|
1232:cj
1134:|
1045:|
1043:cj
1009:)
999:}}
993:{{
989:}}
983:{{
968:|
966:cj
943:|
941:cj
846:yr
785:yr
754:|
609:?
596:yr
503:.
381:.
129:|
94:ā
64:ā
1917:Z
1908:é¾
1905:ā
1899:ā
1895:]
1595:t
1524:t
1385:(
1287:(
1126:(
1108:Z
1099:é¾
1096:ā
1090:ā
1005:(
926:Ā·
921:(
850:a
781:a
691:a
687:y
658:a
654:a
650:a
642:a
583:a
554:)
497:A
478:.
457:Z
448:é¾
445:ā
439:ā
432:a
415:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.