Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)

1531:. I thought that was a bit funny, as it should technically be a subset of "events" or "numbers and dates". Did someone slip that onto the page over there after the above discussion, or was it already there? And what should be done about those earthquakes (that's what set this all off for me). I moved a couple to fit what I thought was the standard way to title (not name) earthquake articles, but now I'm not sure what to do. If you look at the examples I gave, different names give differing amounts of information to the reader. Some earthquakes have local names, some are widely known by another name, many have absolutely no name at all. The USGS seems to introduce them as date (day, month, year), location, and size. With the occassional 'common' name thrown in when an earthquake has acquired one. I suppose if the names are a mess in the real world, then Knowledge article titles will inevitably reflect that. Would that be a good way to sum this up? 2540:, because most of our sources come from the 1900's, and someone writing about the century they're living in is more likely to say "this century" than "in the 1900s". Let's stay focused on 1800s and earlier, instead of trying to make a general rule by extrapolating from the boundary cases of 1900s and 2000s and 0s. The first hit on "1800s" is the Knowledge page. The next 20 are not from Knowledge, and concern the century. I'll keep going if I need to. Google suggests two related searches, "1800s timeline" and "life in the 1800s". The first 10 of each of those also concern the century. - Dan 2136:) would need to be renamed. Templates that reference such categories and articles would need to be modified. There may even be a few objects in other namespaces that need to be modified. Links to such, even in userspace, would need to be modified. In order for sort order to be maintained, sort key defaults (and some non-defaults) would have to be set back to the original name. (Well, maybe not. It's hard to test category sort keys.) Oh, and it would become much more difficult to rerun the category sort key modification which was run at my suggestion at 2306:(policy!), some things that aren't allowed: "proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, et cetera". This subject has come up several times, and I've never seen anyone present any evidence that "1800s" meaning 1800-1809 isn't Knowledge's own made-up term. (And that's moving the goalposts quite a bit; usually the argument is over whether enough people in the proper sources use a term to justify it.) I can stretch ... barely ... to admitting that in certain tables and infoboxes, 3640:. At present, these two guidelines are in conflict; the main guideline for naming articles about events states that the year should precede the rest of the title and should not be in parentheses, but the "Articles on events" section of the numbers and dates guideline provides the option of using "bracketed disambiguator style". My impression is that this guideline has simply not been updated to match the main guideline for naming conventions for events; the second example of "bracketed disambiguator style", 2671:

templates, and use a bot to delink most occurrences of 1800s, with a note in the edit summary saying what we're up to and where people can complain if they didn't want us to delink? If there's not a bot already approved for that purpose, we'd have to get approval at WP:BOT. My main question is: would bot approval be a necessary step to get broad consensus for doing something, or can we do without? Bot approval would be more difficult than getting consensus at, say, WP:VPP. - Dan

4753:(which, BTW, abbreviates "2019" to "19" per the conventional name of the disease), that is three starting with "2019–2020" and two starting with "2019–20", would likely rather look at the more specific "events" naming convention for their article title than at the general "numbers and dates" naming convention, so, if, for instance we'd like to standardize as much as possible on full years for ranges that should probably be reflected in the "events" guidance (too). -- 44: 4695:– that is not the distinction of since and after, e.g. "Olympic Games since Pierre de Coubertin" is not a synonym of "Olympic Games after Pierre de Coubertin", and that is unrelated to whether these Games still exist or not (e.g. also "Olympic Games since the 8th century BC" would mostly be understood as "Olympic Games starting from and including the 8th century BC", which is not a synonym of "Olympic Games after the 8th century BC") 2329:, also policy: "Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. This is justified by the following principle: The names of Knowledge articles should be optimized for readers over editors, and for a general audience over specialists." - Dan 1908:

farther and saying there's no problem here, and I am just not getting that. If our article called "cow" was about a fish, and 4/5 or more of the editors who linked to "cow" thought they were linking to a cow, wouldn't that be a problem, even if we had very good reasons for why the article should really be about a fish? This is the kind of argument that makes me want to upgrade

2599:← I've just finished reading this... I must say I don't like the inconsistency that will be created, but, well, we have to bow to the real world. I fully support Dan(k55)'s idea for disambiguation pages; since there is so much confusion concerning naming, we need to employ our best means of resolving naming conflicts. (As a plus, we dispose of a few hatnotes along the way.) 2105:

long as we keep redirects (or dab pages of the type suggested above) in place the whole time while the links and templates are being sorted out. There will then be no pressing need for simultaneity. Categories should be renamed as well, I guess, by the same arguments, and in accordance with general principles that categories are named like articles.--

3895: 1553:, along with the current move request, but before I create any more earthquake articles, I want to make sure I don't get bogged down in any more arguments over what title the articles should be at. What would be the best way to do that, and still fit in with the necessarily slow development of naming convention guidelines? 2505:

appears only one of the next 10 refers to the century. This is very difficult to verify, as you actually have to look at each page to determine, rather than depending on the google summary. Now, I know the google test is unreliable, not necessarily representative of the "real world", but it shows that it's not "

3038:

That decadebox seems clear to me; I don't want to change that. Okay, I'll post a link at WP:VPP and WT:MOS to this discussion, and I'll let you guys know if they develop a separate thread. I've already posted at WT:YEARS, and we got here from WT:MOSNUM; please alert anyone else that you think might

2104:

It would help to evaluate consensus if those (well, Arthur at the moment) who say they're "opposed" could say why. If there are no arguments against the principle of the change (as there seem not to be at the moment), then we can decide on a strategy for implementing it. It won't be too difficult, as

1409:

Should we have a standard format where the article on an event that does not recur at regular intervals (or didn't recur at all)? Currently there is no "standard format" for the representation of the time indicator, This creates inconsistency as well to the project. I feel that a conclusive consensus

652:

indicated this only as the third option: since the "years in titles" NC guideline proposal only marked the two other options as acceptable, "Event (year)" is not applied very frequently yet in wikipedia, so I decided, for the time being, not to try to go too much against tide. As I said above, if the

2504:

Actually, thinking about it a google search shows reasonable traction for 1900s (or the clearly improper 1900's) as referring to the years 1900 through 1909. The first 10 google hits include Knowledge, three pages about a pop music group, and 6 articles about the decade, none about the century. It

2247:

Yes, we have to follow real-world usage, not what we would like to be true. It would be far more neat and consistent if year 1 were preceded by year 0, but that's not something Knowledge can enact. We probably won't know what humanity decides to call the present decade until we're well into the next

1981:

I'm basically with Dank's reasoning all the way. Not sure that the 1800s can really mean 1801–1900, but the precise content of the dab page is a detail that needn't bother us right now. Just because we don't know what to call the present decade is no excuse for calling other decades things that they

2665:

Should bots be used for anything? (I'm asking; I'm not a big fan of bots personally, because they tend to generate a bit of drama; I'm generally content if we can make articles that have been through some kind of review process look right.) For instance, it's unlikely that someone who doesn't know

2554:

Pretty much all of the decade articles prior to the 20th century are basically "proleptic", applying today's conception of decades to an earlier time when it's likely people didn't refer to things in quite the same manner we do now. Well, maybe in the late 19th century there were some similarities

4722:

according to your proposals above: if these stick to the improved name proposals, then we can start talking about updating the naming convention accordingly. If, on the other hand, consensus established through a lack of sticking page moves indicates otherwise, then maybe, eventually, even the MOS

4026:

I think there are two items involves here -- the first would be how this can work with new articles, and the second with how this works with items that are already in the literature. I agree there should be a discussion and policy on this, though one aspect of this should also be how people in the

3340:

I'm pretty sure I agree. This doesn't seem like the page for it, and if it is, then it should be much shorter. We've talked about this before; there's a tendency for guidelines and naming conventions to accumulate a huge pile of stuff that won't be of interest to 99.9% of the people who actually

581:

issue I read in your remarks, i.e.: balance between "instruction" and "multiple option recommendation": I tried to keep on the "safe" side this time, too instructive is more often a problem than presenting sensible options without pressure (that can always be made more stringent afterwards, in the

1912:

to a guideline. Words (and symbols and phrases) don't mean what we say they mean, they mean what the dictionaries say they mean. Dictionaries are well-developed, and fantastic at representing nuance and consensus, and when they're not, we'll know because we'll pick up evidence of that in other

1811:

Sept, whose reason? The typical editor isn't up to speed on our practices, and if you look at WhatLinksHere to 1800s etc, you'll see that well-meaning editors were trying to link to 1800-1899. I'm open to the suggestion that my reasons aren't helpful, but how do we change the minds of all the

624:

article mentions the numeric value of these letters read as Roman numeral). I think consistency of "x (number)" and "xxxx" year articles more important. IMHO Roman numerals should keep second plane, while their ordering principle is not really compatible with several other established wikipedia

2707:

Yes, but arguing for the Dark Side: if the changes we have in mind don't make a lot of sense unless there's a bot task somewhere in the future, then the first step is to see if we can get approval for that task at WP:BOT, since that's the hard part, even if we're asking for future, conditional

2670:

in their article. Discussions over the past several months show wide support for discouraging linking of anything to do with dates unless we're trying to put special attention on the date. Rather than go through every page in Special:WhatLinksHere to 1800s etc, would it make sense to fix the

1907:

because we already have an article that's almost the same thing, I think that would be okay, as long as we "salt" it (prohibit re-creation) so that when people try to link to 1800s, they immediately get the red link and know there's a problem (and hopefully, remove the link). But you're going

1766:

Strong support. When you look at WhatLinksHere to "1800s", you'll find that, naturally enough, all writers not familiar with Knowledge's jargon (I'm working on WP:JARGON at the moment :) thought they were linking to 1800-1899, so the page as it stands now (representing a decade) confuses most

3901:

An editor has requested that {{subst:linked|Talk:911 (disambiguation)}} be moved to {{subst:#if:|{{subst:linked|{{{2}}}}}|another page}}{{subst:#switch: project |user | USER = . Since you had some involvement with 'Talk:911 (disambiguation)', you |#default = , which may be of interest to this

1540:

Francis, thanks for the election naming convention update. Was there a talk page discussion somewhere to support that? I really would like to start a discussion somewhere to get guidance on how to decide on a title for earthquake articles, as I want to start filling in the gaps in Knowledge's

2485:

and related built-in macros. There are two different types of templates that need to be considered; those which are included in the decade articles, and those which link to decade articles. To avoid redlinks, the former need to be changed before the move, and the latter after. —

1751:. (Other decades not ending in 00s, i.e. 1810s, 1820s, etc., would be unaffected.) This move was generally supported (at least at MoS) though was never acted on. Any opposition to doing it now? I know it means various templates need to be updated, but that can be done as well. -- 4723:

page on dates and numbers might need to be readjusted. Note that the big & fundamental difference between MOS pages and naming conventions is that the former mostly follows external style guides, while the latter follows whatever Knowledge editors decide in accordance with

2457:, then change the templates, in order to avoid redlinks. And I don't see much additional confusion in what you illustrate there - most real people are going to be more confused by the way things are at the moment, by seeing 1800s as a subcategory of 19th century.-- 204:

Some of the problems of overcrowded and overlinked to pages could be alleviated by removing the screwball connection between preferences and ordinary linking. Can't someone get the developers to come up with some independent scheme to make date preferences work?

3441:

Seems reasonable to me, at least for 2000s (and I believe we found 1900s to be quite often used for the decade as well). How about the older ones - is there really enough usage for 1800s, 1700s etc. as decades to justify their being considered "correct" in that

4727:, meaning that one would always need consistent WP:RM outcomes before a change to the naming conventions guidelines (in other words, if the actual page naming isn't going to some sort of consistency, then don't bother to write a new naming conventions rule). -- 4055:

for a move discussion involving numbers 101 to 125, note that after those have been processed numbers 126 to 150, then 151 to 175, then 176 to 200, then finally any other. Any that are objected at that discussion page or at RMT will be subject to a normal RM.

3873:

I believe it depends on the style used in the country in which the event took place. For example, the day-month-year" format would be more appropriate for articles related to the UK while the month-day-format would be better for subjects related to the U.S.

3616:

has been initiated to assess the communities’ understanding of our title decision making policy. As a project that has created or influenced subject specific naming conventions, participants in this project are encouraged to review and participate in the

1445:

is also acceptable, but maybe giving too much weight to the year (though the guideline fails to mention that it also drops 'Games' from the title). Looking at the articles for Summer Olympic Games, they all use the 'year in front' and 'Olympic Games' -:

2651:(are these the only ones?) to allow the PAGENAME references to be bypassed. At first glance it seems that replacing each {{PAGENAME}} with {{{1}}}0s (plus " BC" in the second template) would work perfectly OK, though I might be missing something.-- 2521:

Yes, I was quite surprised by that. But I think it's particular to 1900s; people haven't generally referred to that century (being the present one or a very recent one) in that way. Look up 1800s, 1700s etc. and I think you'll get quite different

2310:

may be "prettier", but only if the user is likely to find out fairly quickly that 1800-1809 is meant. A pagename of 1800–1809 is helpful, and so is a disambig page, and "1800s here means 1800–1809" would be helpful in some contexts. - Dan

3147:

I'd say once we move some of them, we move all of them (especially 0s, which looks bizarre). It will make redoing the templates much easier if we are consistent among all the 00s decades (BC as well, for as far back as they currently

585:"March 18, 2001" type articles: I hadn't really discovered the mechanism behind them yet: apparently it works via a template in the "March 18" type articles, only for the years 2003 and up. I added that info to the guideline proposal. 4085:

to clarify our stance on titles which form part of a numbered series whose meaning is not inherently apparent, and whether we should disambiguate for the purpose of clarity even when not strictly necessary. An example would be

4027:

literature are already using the term. In the case of 5 Whys, a quick search in both public as well as academic searches seem to show that the first term is used as a number, namely 5. Thanks for raising this discussion

3583:

Actually, you may be right. The appropriate WikiProject (probably Years, although Timeline may be appropriate) should be informed of this discussion, so that it can be corrected appropriately when changes are made. —

3456:

I tend to agree with your reasoning, I see no reason to tamper with 1800s, 1700s and so on — there isn't enough documented usage for those decades and what they were named colloquially and so on. I think moving simply

3691:

It has been proposed that numbers should be considered the primary topic for articles titled "1" to "100" instead of years. This would require numerous page moves and an amendment to the guidelines. Please discuss at

2173:

It sounds like you're saying it would be better not to rename the cats, and I have absolutely no problem with that. I didn't get "Links to such, even in userspace, would need to be modified." A link in userspace to

4006:

starts with a number usually expressed in numerals, followed by a word or words. The case where this is the title of a work, is already covered; we don't need to duplicate that. This is for common topics that are

3648:

for almost four years now. Considering that bracketed disambiguators serve a separate purpose in Knowledge titles, I suggest that the "bracketed disambiguator style" section simply be removed from this guideline.

2559:

and using "gay" in the then-current meaning of "happy, merry" with no connotation of homosexuality), but probably not that much earlier; certainly, people in 1 AD didn't think they were in the decade of the "0s".

2722:

Well I will be: the renaming by itself will make a lot of things better without making anything much worse. Possible future bot runs or manual link repair campaigns will represent further improvement on top of

653:

time is ready for a more stringent approach, it will not be too difficult to adapt the guideline in that sense (e.g., with an intermediate step of "discouraging" the two other formats for a period of time). --

3613: 77: 4674:(mostly) avoid dates in parentheses at the end of an article title might be a good idea too, but with many exceptions too, e.g. when the date (or date range) is, for instance, a real disambiguator, e.g. 620:

with many meanings (so, a disambig page). I don't think "arbitrary", and don't see what you would delete (...most of them either "harmless" redirect, or a mentioning in a disambig page list - even the

2262:

If we rename the articles and not the categories, we need to refactor an undentified, but large, number of templates, including those in userspace. And there (appears to be) no real-world source for

649: 62: 2140:. It would also become more difficult to automate crosslinkages to make sure that year articles and categories are in decade categories and decade articles and categories are in century categories. 553:

I think some standard would be nice on the repetitive events section, but good luck in getting any. I think we should stick with the "Event (year)" bit because it matches practice in other areas.

3369:

Technically speaking, 1582 is in the Julian calendar through October 4, and the Gregorian calendar from the following day, October 15, after 10 days were skipped. Thus, the year has 355 days.

2693:

set up as a dab page, then links to it will at least not be completely misleading, whatever the intended meaning was. First we need to sort out the templates and actually carry out the moves.--

4472: 67: 700:

This poll hasn't come to a conclusion yet (seen the controversy over the poll, including edit-warring on the poll page, I'm not very inclined to fan its relative importance prematurely);

3053:

Yes, the appearance of the decade box (and similar beasts) doesn't need changing. Just the underlying links under the xx00s ought to be changed (but after the moves have taken place).--

645: 497: 461: 72: 4486: 1903:

Normally I don't argue back and forth in a thread; it's too easy to become obnoxious. But I'm not following, Dan T. If you're saying it would be better if there's no article named

3998:, without success. This article seems to be the one that comes the closest to it. So, I'm requesting that we come up with some verbiage to add to the guideline, probably in section 2057:; would it really cause any harm to be consistent with my suggestion and go with something like ]?. (What I'm saying is that you would see 100s BC in the table, but go to the page 4517: 2178:

could still go there, regardless of whether the user was thinking of the decade or the century; either way, they'll find out there's ambiguity when they get to the DAB page. - Dan

1868:

that covers 1801-1900; do we need another article for a range shifted one year from this? The current style has the virtue of consistency with all the other decade articles like

3407:, and likewise with all other relevant decades. This would remove ambiguity all the while keeping with convention (the only notable name for the current decade as of present is " 3833:

Hi, I'm working on an article with a very specific date (day/month/year). Are both acceptable? I prefer the first option because I'm using the "Month, Day" format in my draft.

261:

in article names in a separate guideline (instead of the "years in titles" guideline proposal, that was IMHO not really coming out of the "proposal" stage); also separate from

2083:

We don't seem to be pulling a crowd here. Let's give it a couple of days and see if we can get consensus; if not, then maybe add the RfC tag and a notice at the Pump? - Dan

250: 1541:

coverage in this area (mainly older, pre-20th century earthquakes). I would go ahead with using the Disasters Wikiproject naming convention, but I had a bad experience with

1966:

with ], although my personal preference would be to avoid ever seeing "1800s" refer to 1800 to 1809, even in infoboxes. But I acknowledge I may not win on this one. - Dan

3296:. Occasionally for years from 1582 to well in the 20th century (when the last countries converted to Gregorian calendar), dates in the "year"/"day" articles are mentioned 30: 4543: 3553:

Grumble. OK, I tend to like this change, but you have to remember that (one of the) (protected) templates transcluded by Yearbox, Decadebox, etc., needs to be modfied

4774: 3999: 1571: 1510: 1434: 704: 528: 487: 447: 246: 3112:, but inconsistency would be less than satisfying, and I have no opinion on the best way to handle the fuzzy cases. Should every such page be moved, even including 1743:

The convention for decades has been discussed before (at the Years project and at the Manual of Style); no-one came up with any convincing reason for having (e.g.)

151: 4427: 4382: 469: 1545:, which I requested a translation of from the French at that page title, and a few days later (even before the translation process was finished) it got moved to 712: 262: 1747:

referring to the decade as it does now, rather than the century as it does in real-world English. It was proposed then to rename these pages to (for example)

1513:

guideline page are used (I made all "examples" reflect real examples now), and I think these three formats are enough to choose from for recurring events. --

4457: 4412: 4227: 1496: 2229:. I wish we hadn't done tables and infoboxes that way, but we did, and I can compromise on keeping that appearance, as long as the actual page linked is 4241: 1625: 1459:, you can see that this guideline hasn't been followed. They all write the second year as two digits instead of the full year and drop the brackets (eg. 507: 423: 2194:

To the anal-retentive personality like me, there's some attraction to maintaining the neat lineup of consistency up and down the line... if you've got

2847: 2817: 2803: 1468: 588:

Roman numerals: I don't really think the "weirdness" can be much helped, because of the weirdness of how Romans wrote down numbers. Take for instance

4746: 4397: 1935:, which means that we can't explain in article-space how we got into this mess and how Knowledge deals with this in a jargony way. I propose that 2631:

Well, having convinced ourselves we're right about this, I suppose we have to get down to work. As Arthur points out, the first step is to change

292:

Just for the record, I support individual pages, though some dates should probably be disambiguation pages with (Gregorian) or (Julian) appended.

3612:

policy. That contentiousness has led to efforts to improve the overall effectiveness of the policy and associated processes. An RFC entitled:

1931:

Sorry, I got carried away. We don't in general need more guidelines, we just need to be more rational and follow the guidelines ... including

1600:

Since no-one has replied to this contradiction over several months, I am going ahead and changing the hyphen to an en-dash in conformance with

4340: 4326: 4742: 3637: 4213: 3983:

I'd like to request feedback by users familiar with number usage in article titles, to respond at that discussion about the individual case.

1663:) when there is no year article but would only be a redirect to an article about a century or a millennium. I came across a dispute between 1590:. I personally opt for the latter (even though the former is easier to type), but more importantly, the contradiction should be resolved. 4146: 4108: 1382:), with occasional references to the interval (4th disambiguation), and rare references to 1/10 (1st disambiguation). I've added a second 4667:

partial standardization on full years (for ranges) might be a good idea: partial, that is except for (many) common name exceptions (e.g.

3162:

Actually, I take that back, it's overkill to post talk page notices given that there's been no opposition on any of the relevant pages.

3104:

to preserve the content and history (with minor adjustments in the text). It would solve 99% of the problem of wrong links to move only

3007: 1725: 4586: 4502: 4442: 4284: 1587: 3778: 3731: 746: 2747:

The disambiguation page idea makes sense to me. However, "in tables and infoboxes" is still a self-ref, and so should not appear. —

1713: 1686: 957: 948: 939: 930: 921: 912: 903: 894: 885: 4354: 3569:

I suspect this won't actually be necessary (at least, not urgently), as long as the current names are left in place as redirects.--

1848:

It is terrible that 1800s is about a decade rather than the 1800-1899 years as most people would expect. Must be corrected Asap.

1830:

reason for keeping these articles (if it is, it's not a very good one). It certainly isn't a reason for having articles misnamed.--

2041:

However, we'd also need to decide if the categories need to be renamed; and, if so, that should also be done at the same time. —

4052: 2981: 1464: 4368: 4312: 3641: 2360:: I could accept 10s (in line with 510s, 1910s, etc.), even though there is unlikely to be much real world usage - there may be 141:, so breaking them up seems reasonable. That said, some thought needs to go into how these pages are organized and linked to. - 4094:, but this RfC would explore the application of this principle to other domains, such as sequentially numbered legislation. -- 2137: 110: 4298: 4269: 4168: 641:. Also I wouldn't know from what number it should flip from a redirect to a number article, to a redirect to a year article... 2412:

before we could consider performing the moves, or a large number of redlinks will appear. The additional confusion in having

2151:. Perhaps this could be minimized if we did a continual bot-automated category redirect for each renamed category, and from 2053:

Agreed on all 3 points, Arthur, since it should be easy to locate and change the templates, except not agreed (probably) for

1456: 3645: 4590: 4082: 3669: 3293: 2976: 2605: 1460: 683: 546:

The bit about Roman numbers is weird. Some of them redirect to years, others to numbers. Arguably some should redirect to

503:

These two initiatives started more or less concurrently, neither of them anything near to "guideline" status presently. --

1690: 1528: 1450: 194:

are indistinguishable or nearly so on the page, if it weren't for the fact that preferences don't work with the former.

3959: 1579: 1524: 4198: 4183: 1647:

I don't think that this guideline actually is sufficient to support the notion that we shouldn't have redirects like

4786: 4762: 4736: 4713: 4658: 4114: 4071: 4040: 4020: 3922: 3883: 3860: 3823: 3783: 3749: 3736: 3700: 3681: 3658: 3626: 3591: 3578: 3564: 3548: 3513: 3485: 3451: 3435: 3378: 3364: 3350: 3334: 3201: 3179: 3157: 3139: 3062: 3048: 3028: 2772: 2758: 2732: 2717: 2702: 2680: 2660: 2626: 2611: 2587: 2569: 2549: 2531: 2516: 2493: 2466: 2448: 2395: 2338: 2320: 2297: 2281: 2257: 2242: 2219: 2187: 2168: 2114: 2092: 2078: 2048: 2011: 1995: 1975: 1922: 1893: 1857: 1839: 1821: 1802: 1776: 1760: 1733: 1675: 1637: 1613: 1594: 1557: 1535: 1517: 1489: 1475: 1423: 1369: 1349: 732: 687: 657: 570: 550:. Some consistency would be nice. And arguably, a lot of deletion since many of these seem to be entirely arbitrary. 454: 298: 277: 236: 209: 165: 145: 129: 4758: 4732: 4709: 3677: 3539:

I've always preferred "2000s" for consistency with other decades; I never liked the awkward switch to "2000-2009".

774: 539:. We probably don't need an article for each day in history. So which days get their own articles, and which go in 531:

looks good to me, and to the best of my knowledge matches most of what we already have. Let's see, some remarks...

520: 17: 4675: 3932:

How should we entitle articles consisting of a number first, and words second? In a case similar to the examples

3325:

I am not convinced that this helped anybody; it is also questionable in detail. I have therefore brought it here.

3260: 2969: 1438: 679: 491: 465: 355: 270: 162: 4255: 2797:

include code that masks it. I subjoin {{decadebox|180}} as a reminder what a useful thing we are talking about.

851: 87: 4103: 4087: 3850: 3609: 2600: 1481:

Francis Schonken changed the U.S. example - thanks for that. Anyone know anything about the other examples? Is

479:

So there are two relatively new initiatives to get the "years in titles" NC guideline out of its long-standing

405:

Rewrite guideline to match majority of articles; leave events with different, but consistent format as they are

3986:

Secondly, and perhaps more important: what about adding some verbiage to this page, to cover the general case?

2408:

Even if we can reach consensus that the move is desirable, we would still need to get the templates rewritten

2120:

The problem is much larger than it first appeared, even to me. For it to make sense, not only the articles (

4065: 3000: 1729: 1485:

just accepted as an exception, and are the football league ones named in a different style for some reason?

373: 363: 159: 91: 4668: 3523:

On a related issue another user has tried to correct the use of the term "the 2000s decade" in the lede to

2475:

appear directly as the result of a move, but only in the article moved, because of the templates which use

342:

is used only as a disambiguator, giving no more detail than is needed for disambiguation, which would be a

3945: 3771: 3724: 3588: 3561: 3189: 2513: 2490: 2445: 2294: 2278: 2165: 2045: 2038:

need to be changed. (Any reference to the decade expressed literally could be handled by disambiguation.)

1346: 154:, and there was no consensus. I agree with Simon that we could use a discussion about how best to do this 4646:...I would not propose to favour one as each seems to pattern with single-year titles of similar articles 2128:) would need to be renamed, but the auxilliary categories (24 first level, with one already renamed, for 861: 846: 841: 670:

It looks good to me, but perhaps a mention of the style guideline for BC/BCE usage would be appropriate?

4754: 4728: 4705: 4136: 4091: 3673: 3120: 2964: 2959: 2645: 2413: 2152: 1591: 1550: 1542: 1514: 856: 836: 729: 654: 504: 451: 274: 4704:: a few general principles, and an indication of many exceptions, but without too much nitty-gritty. -- 811: 2364:

usage, and at least there isn't another obvious meaning that people would expect for these terms. But

821: 816: 4538: 4125: 4003: 3713:

I followed up at that RM on template changes that I believe should be done first before the moves. —

3622: 3509: 3490:

I think it reasonable to generalize; many of these articles are retrospective anyway, beginning with

3330: 3024: 2583: 1986:

called. This offends against goodness-knows-how-many WP principles, quite apart from common sense. --

1798: 1698: 1482: 1442: 468:, if you ever visit that page). Up till today only three people voted in that poll. And then there's 359: 1913:

reference works. Every ghit on "1800s" that doesn't come from Knowledge refers to 1800-1899. - Dan

536: 4701: 4533:

In my opinion some standardisation could help; here are my thoughts (suggested additions in bold):

4098: 4095: 3795: 3570: 3528: 3443: 3356: 3222:

Without going too technical, for standard use in articles on time periods, a "year" is defined as:

3149: 3054: 2724: 2694: 2652: 2523: 2458: 2387: 2249: 2106: 1987: 1831: 1752: 1672: 1412: 265:, that does not give many clues on article naming. Anyway, for the time being I copy this topic to 3396: 3185: 3167: 1189: 953: 4724: 4058: 4016: 3906: 3574: 3498: 3447: 3360: 3307: 3231: 3153: 3089: 3058: 2993: 2788: 2728: 2698: 2656: 2635: 2527: 2462: 2391: 2253: 2110: 1991: 1865: 1853: 1835: 1793:

and its sisters produce a system of chronology, and renaming it will make the template not work.

1787: 1756: 1421: 1386: 1176: 1163: 1150: 1137: 1124: 1111: 1098: 1085: 944: 935: 926: 917: 908: 899: 890: 881: 560: 381: 367: 226: 93: 3949: 3355:

Yep, this is definitely the kind of incomprehensible non-guidance we should be getting rid of.--

4750: 4036: 3761: 3714: 3585: 3558: 3544: 3374: 2565: 2510: 2487: 2479: 2442: 2291: 2275: 2215: 2162: 2042: 1932: 1889: 1342: 873: 675: 206: 183: 138: 118: 3092:. The last issue is to figure out which pages we want to move ... I'm assuming when we make 2158:

I think we'd have herds of broken links or dead categories if this were not done all at once.

1471:. So is this guideline just out-of-date, or are people not following the naming conventions? 4782: 3879: 3819: 3654: 3466: 3416: 3346: 3197: 3175: 3135: 3044: 2768: 2750: 2713: 2676: 2622: 2545: 2402: 2383: 2334: 2316: 2238: 2183: 2088: 2074: 2007: 1971: 1918: 1909: 1817: 1772: 1546: 198: 89: 43: 2061:

when you click.) I would just prefer that we not investigate every occurrence of a link to

1523:

Funnily enough, I was going to mention elections, as they are the only events mentioned at

4775:

Knowledge talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Article titles for years: BC/AD or BCE/BC

4655: 4585:

because parentheses might be misinterpreted as disambiguation. An example that hit me was

3953: 3918: 3618: 3505: 3326: 3264: 3242: 3020: 2579: 2248:

one, but we do know that "1900s", "1800s" etc. are not the common names for any decades.--

1794: 1554: 1532: 1486: 1472: 770: 535:

As noted on the talk page, it may help to put some thought into structuring articles like

4390:

not sure whether this counts as single multi-year event or period slice of longer history

2379: 2058: 2022:, before any of the the articles were changed. And I see no use outside of Knowledge of 2018:

I'm still opposed, but if it were to go through, the templates would need to be adjusted

1826:

Don't worry about the templates; I'll make sure they still work. I'm sure that's not the

1185: 1004: 3670:

Knowledge talk:Article titles‎#Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) approach

2784:, between 1790s and 1810s. I still object to changing that usage, and if it is changed, 2405:. We have enough trouble with AD/CE wars in that era without taking a POV in the title. 1172: 1159: 1146: 1107: 1094: 3166:

requests that discussion be at the first relevant talk page that's moved, which is now

2867: 2810: 2575: 2326: 2148: 2144: 2125: 1633: 1609: 1601: 1583: 1256: 1252: 1234: 716: 694: 547: 3462: 3458: 3101: 2419: 2230: 1955: 1748: 4679: 4550: 4028: 4012: 3995: 3754:

Please comment at the follow-up RfC on how the topic of years 1-100 should be titled

3085: 2887: 2303: 1849: 1417: 1260: 1248: 1238: 1225: 995: 869: 829: 782: 630: 557: 284: 223: 126: 122: 1962:

As we have time, we can then go through the infoboxes (maybe with bots) and replace

4719: 4634: 4582: 4570: 4566: 4562: 4558: 4032: 3991: 3967: 3909: 3841: 3540: 3370: 3163: 3127: 3081: 3073: 2838: 2832: 2826: 2686: 2561: 2506: 2211: 1885: 1664: 1221: 1217: 1213: 671: 295: 4700:

I'd avoid to give too much detailed bandwidth to this in the actual guideline per

2708:

approval. What happens if a bot never runs, are we happy with the results? - Dan

2225:

There is no support in sources that I'm aware of for a meaning of "1900–1909" for

977: 402:

Abolish guideline and use official name of event, i.e. the name the organizers use

4691: 4687: 4638: 4629: 4624: 4611: 4607: 4600: 4577: 4554: 4000:

Articles on years, articles on numbers, article names containing non-date numbers

1624:

Would commas in article names that use large numbers be acceptable? For example,

4778: 4129: 3937: 3875: 3815: 3650: 3342: 3193: 3171: 3131: 3040: 2764: 2709: 2672: 2618: 2541: 2330: 2312: 2234: 2179: 2084: 2070: 2003: 1967: 1914: 1813: 1768: 1668: 1393: 1366: 1359: 1072: 1051: 739: 597: 187: 142: 4090:(as there is no other notable "Symphony No. 104"), which is already covered by 3608:

Over the past several months there has been contentious debate over aspects of

3399:, where a variety of editors have agreed that we should change the title from 3315: 3311: 3077: 1702: 1572:

Knowledge:Naming_conventions (numbers_and_dates)#Bracketed_disambiguator_style

1037: 1024: 986: 625:

ordering principles (like for instance the TLA category). I wouldn't redirect

472:, which is older, and maybe more to your liking, but presently no more than a 420: 362:, and there is not even a redirect! I found the same with Winter olympics and 2372:

any of those nine years). In any case, when we change the others (500s -: -->

1783:

Oppose, as before. The only reason to have such an article at all is to make

137:

The most recent month pages are getting far too long, and many now appear on

3963: 3933: 3272: 2685:

I guess Lightbot might help, since I believe it already delinks things like

1629: 1605: 389: 377: 1939:

be a disambig page that follows the usual disambig format and says simply:

563: 229: 2555:

in terminology (that's when they had the "Gay Nineties", referring to the

1812:

editors who are linking to 1800s, thinking that it means 1800-1899? - Dan

1447:'Olympics' style. So what is going on there? Then there is the example of 3746: 3708: 3697: 3310:

example above, and the entry of the start of that revolution both in the

2763:

Thanks, and good point. Deleted from the suggested DAB page above. - Dan

2290:

is probably used more often in Knowledge than elsewhere in the world. —

2002:

Good point, and I just changed the suggested dab page accordingly. - Dan

1719: 1706: 644:"Event (year)" is my preferred format too, but for the 5 or so voters on 540: 3894: 3636:

I propose that the "Articles on events" section be brought in line with

3868: 3834: 3491: 2943: 2938: 2933: 2928: 2923: 2916: 2911: 2906: 2901: 2896: 2054: 2031: 385: 289:

Is there a policy discussion still going on about this? If so, where?

3188:

that may need discussion, such as whether to make use of a page named

2453:

No, no redlinks appear as a result of a move. We have to do the moves

1329:

I've proposed these for deletion. He's now redirected one of them to

1133: 1120: 1081: 1068: 336:

is the existing article title (non-redirect) that describes the event;

3941: 3755: 3742: 3693: 3411:") and consistency (all 9 other decades of the centuries are titled " 1575: 1041: 795: 408:

Rewrite guideline to match majority of articles (either <year: -->

316:

The recommended format for separate articles on events that recur at

4641:

per MOS:DATERANGE although I really prefer the shorter in this case.

4745:, which has some related guidance. E.g. the five events listed at 3109: 3097: 3093: 2878: 2873: 2861: 2856: 2690: 2667: 2556: 2537: 2434: 2429: 2424: 2226: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2175: 2121: 2066: 2062: 1963: 1936: 1904: 1877: 1873: 1869: 1744: 1379: 1363: 1330: 1193: 1180: 1055: 1028: 1008: 791: 3614:

Knowledge talk:Article titles/RFC-Article title decision practice

450:

page), so the rest of Mkill's comment becomes quite senseless. --

395:

The only consistency seems to be that the guideline is not used.

182:

Additional problems include the fact that mislinked dates, using

3971: 3524: 3276: 3254: 3246: 3235: 3105: 2287: 1671:

on this issue and felt it should be resolved in a wider forum. —

1660: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1453:(note that each year is written in full, separated by a hyphen)" 1375: 1355: 1319: 1313: 1307: 1301: 1291:

I'm not sure about these. They probably should be reverted per

1283: 1277: 1271: 1265: 1244: 1230: 1209: 1167: 1154: 1141: 1128: 1115: 1102: 1089: 1076: 1047: 981: 626: 304:

guidelines and practice don't match for olympic games and others

191: 4621:

single multi-year event: currently there are these patterns...

3072:←We seem to have consensus; there's been no strong reaction at 1433:

I was wondering why some of the examples are red-linked in the

4718:

Anyhow, I'd recommend to proceed with a few page moves and/or

3527:. For discussion of the confusion arising from this usage see 2357: 2267: 2027: 1694: 1566:

Conflicting style guidelines! Date ranges: en dash or hyphen?

1033: 1020: 650:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Archive 01

634: 621: 617: 609: 94: 37: 3829:"May 1, 2015 Jalisco attacks" or "1 May 2015 Jalisco attacks" 3893: 2270:, either. I think, perhaps, consistency may be better than 2069:

etc before we make the change; it would take forever. - Dan

1864:

It's a little confusing, but there's already an article for

117:

Is see user Pcb21 is making many new pages with titles like

4473:

History of US science fiction and fantasy magazines to 1950

3113: 2365: 2353: 2263: 2023: 1876:, etc. Out in the "real world", we're near the end of the 999: 990: 803:(I think they're now at least the same disambiguation page) 197:

Another problem is the fact that there is no redirect from

2138:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Time#Category sort key proposal

1467:, when that is actually a redirect, and the article is at 253:, thinking it would be better to treat the whole scope of 249:

a few hours ago, as the result of a revived discussion on

3268: 3250: 638: 589: 4077:

RfC notice: Titles which are part of an ambiguous series

3970:

followed up by starting a discussion after the fact, at

3810:, and which may lead to also moving the remaining seven 3076:(the discussion page for the proposal I put there is at 2689:. But there's no urgency about the links - once we have 646:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Poll

498:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Poll

462:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Poll

4124:

Check out the variation in these titles. I don't think

3811: 2666:

Knowledge jargon meant 1800–1809 if they chose to link

2578:. Not all of them had adjectives, but that's true now. 972:(number), but I don't think they should be there at all 648:

this was not the unanimous choice. Also prior talk on

415:

Enforce old guideline with mass renaming and relinking

352:

But the actual format used for events is <year: -->

3902:

WikiProject. You}} are invited to participate in ].

1497:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions/Archive 9#Elections

1293:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)

751:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)

412:); rename all articles that don't match new guideline 267:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)

243:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates)

755:

List of "bad" articles he's created (IMHO) include:

4487:

History of Bombay under Portuguese rule (1534–1661)

3798:, which proposes to move nine articles of the form 1884:seems to be no clear consensus on what to call it. 1681:

Proposal to amend the naming convention for numbers

1437:section? it seems strange that the guidelines give 1378:only means the ordinal 10 (2nd disambiguation from 251:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)

18:

Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)

4494:dates superfluous given no other Portuguese period 303: 31:Knowledge talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) 4769:RFC notice: BC or BCE, AD or CE in article titles 4527:Political history of Mysore and Coorg, 1565–1760 4518:Political history of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760) 3973:Talk:Five Whys#Article name change - 5 Whys : --> 3302:add a notification according to which calendar!!! 2574:Use of decades as named periods goes back to the 4576:period slices within a longer history should be 3668:A new addition to this guideline is proposed at 3300:according to Gregorian calendar: in these cases 3130:) on every talk page that will get moved. - Dan 1511:Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) 705:Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) 529:Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) 488:Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) 448:Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) 283:Much better - thank you, now I understand it. - 269:- maybe also list the new guideline proposal on 247:Knowledge:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) 4139: 3796:Talk:10000 (number)#Requested move 25 June 2017 3494:. My principal concern is having the template 152:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/January 1, 2005 3557:or nearly simultaneously with the renames. — 3415:"). I would appreciate input on this request— 3391:I know this matter has already been discussed 470:Knowledge:Naming conventions (years in titles) 4596:if the start or end is not a specified date: 3096:a disambig page, we want to move the current 3001: 2161:Other than that, I have no objection. :) — 713:Knowledge:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) 263:Knowledge:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) 8: 4544:Encyclopedia of Camps and Ghettos, 1933–1945 2210:need to be in between? -- The other Dan... 1693:for numbers and years, and also to redirect 4163:Proposed standardised title if not current 3218:What follows was a footnote to this page. 3080:; they don't invite discussion directly at 1463:). The guideline also gives the example of 358:, given as example in the guideline, is at 4428:History of Aston Villa F.C. (1961–present) 4383:Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962 4144: 4128:covers them. Pinging from above sections: 3008: 2994: 2799: 2368:seems particularly weird (there isn't a 0 1767:readers and makes us look jargon-y. - Dan 1626:Temperature record of the past 1,000 years 719:poll is not likely to change anything re. 376:. The Expo articles are inconsistent, cf. 1469:United States presidential election, 2000 872:, but will probably end up redirected to 4497:History of Bombay under Portuguese rule 4053:User talk:Crouch, Swale/Year DAB#Batch 1 3990:I attempted to find guidance on this at 3928:Titles with a number first, words second 3184:And there are a couple of items over at 2325:First two sentences in first section of 1410:would create less inconsistency here. -- 4467:History of the Soviet Union, 1964–1982 4458:History of the Soviet Union (1964–1982) 4437:History of Aston Villa F.C. since 1961 4422:History of Aston Villa F.C., 1874–1961 4413:History of Aston Villa F.C. (1874–1961) 4132: 3972:_Five_Whys" title="Talk:Five Whys": --> 3940:, but the other way round, the article 2951: 2886: 2846: 2816: 2802: 2441:… is better left to the imagination. — 2378:be consistent to change 0s as well (to 1709:, while overwhelming, is 2 years old.) 1705:. (Note that the consensus against on 1643:Far future and "plausible" search terms 4671:might be such a common name exception) 2274:articles matching real-world uses. — 2132:) and articles (3 first level, in the 1586:explicitly calls for an en dash, e.g. 1549:. The arguments for both sides are at 1529:Knowledge:Naming_conventions#Elections 1429:Are people following these guidelines? 4743:Knowledge:Naming conventions (events) 3944:has long been at that title, but was 3790:Requested move for five-digit numbers 3638:Knowledge:Naming conventions (events) 3306:This might seem complicated: see the 745:(Copied from the wrong place to both 608:meanings are listed on the "C" page. 158:people start making radical changes. 125:articles. Is this current policy? -- 7: 3387:First decade of each century revival 1527:that have their own convention. See 1015:(OK, these aren't confusing, anyway) 464:going on presently (as indicated on 398:Four different proposed solutions: 4773:Please see the RFC taking place at 4747:2019–2020 outbreak (disambiguation) 4589:; was that a temporary state, like 4407:History of Arsenal F.C., 1886–1966 4398:History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) 3694:Talk:1#Requested move 5 August 2016 3504:work predictably and intelligibly. 2780:I believe 1800s is perfectly clear 1354:What's the problem? Why is it that 798:to be separate disambiguation pages 703:It is outside the present scope of 4522:period slice within longer history 4507:period slice within longer history 4491:period slice within longer history 4477:period slice within longer history 4462:period slice within longer history 4447:period slice within longer history 4432:period slice within longer history 4417:period slice within longer history 4402:period slice within longer history 4228:Byzantine–Bulgarian war of 894–896 3288:1581 some countries continued the 1499:, an aborted attempt to add still 1495:Anyway, maybe also have a look at 1441:as an example, and then later say 747:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Numbers 25: 4741:Another thought: please see also 4341:Siege of Constantinople (717–718) 4327:Siege of Constantinople (674–678) 4242:Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628 4176:three events, in 1210, 1270, 1277 4173:discrete events within a timespan 2617:What's the next step here? - Dan 2382:, or perhaps better in this case 1451:UEFA Champions League (2005-2006) 958:Negative and non-negative numbers 949:Negative and non-negative numbers 940:Negative and non-negative numbers 931:Negative and non-negative numbers 922:Negative and non-negative numbers 913:Negative and non-negative numbers 904:Negative and non-negative numbers 895:Negative and non-negative numbers 886:Negative and non-negative numbers 592:, it's even not unambiguous as a 4549:dateranges in titles should per 4452:History of Lithuania, 1219–1295 4214:Byzantine civil war of 1341–1347 3979:I have two comments about this: 3604:RFC – WP title decision practice 3529:Talk:2009/Archive 3#2000s decade 3395:, but I have revived it over at 1509:). All formats currently on the 1465:U.S. presidential election, 2000 42: 4047:3 digit number move discussions 1701:and rename the main article as 1578:in an article date range, e.g. 721:pagenames of non-redirect pages 709:pagenames of non-redirect pages 582:case that would be desirable). 442:, it's only a (relatively new) 111:Knowledge:Village pump (policy) 4763:02:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC) 4737:02:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC) 4714:02:13, 22 September 2020 (UTC) 4678:is an actual example from the 4659:23:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC) 4587:Kingdom of Hungary (1000–1301) 4512:Kingdom of Hungary, 1000–1301 4503:Kingdom of Hungary (1000–1301) 4443:History of Lithuania (1219–95) 4147:History articles, GA or better 4041:01:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC) 4021:00:06, 11 September 2019 (UTC) 4002:, to cover the case where the 3884:18:51, 11 September 2018 (UTC) 3659:13:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC) 3365:10:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 3351:20:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC) 3335:20:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC) 3202:01:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC) 3180:23:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC) 3158:15:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC) 3140:14:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC) 3063:14:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC) 3049:02:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC) 3029:00:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC) 2773:20:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC) 2759:20:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC) 2733:16:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2718:15:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2703:15:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2681:14:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2661:14:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2627:14:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2612:13:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC) 2588:00:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC) 2570:20:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2550:18:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2536:We haven't been talking about 2532:18:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2517:17:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2494:18:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2467:18:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2449:17:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2396:17:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2339:11:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2321:11:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2298:08:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2282:08:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2258:07:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2243:01:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2220:00:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 2188:22:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 2169:21:46, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 2115:21:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 2093:20:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 2079:20:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 2049:19:58, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 2012:20:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 1996:19:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 1976:16:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 1923:12:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 1894:12:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 1858:23:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC) 1840:10:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC) 1822:20:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC) 1803:19:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC) 1777:13:36, 19 September 2008 (UTC) 1761:12:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC) 1588:Philippines campaign (1944–45) 1457:Category:UEFA Champions League 1: 4591:Kingdom of Italy (Napoleonic) 4279:Janszoon voyage of 1605–1606 4072:20:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC) 3794:Editors may be interested in 3627:16:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 3294:Old Style and New Style dates 1614:21:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC) 1461:UEFA Champions League 2005-06 1424:22:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC) 1044:(completely wrong, this time) 733:12:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 688:10:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 658:20:54, 28 December 2005 (UTC) 571:16:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC) 278:17:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 237:17:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC) 210:12:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC) 166:20:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC) 146:19:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC) 130:17:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC) 4787:18:44, 29 October 2022 (UTC) 4537:real-world titles and other 4355:Siege of Jerusalem (636–637) 3861:00:23, 18 October 2017 (UTC) 3687:Proposal on numbers 1 to 100 3392: 1952:The period from 1800 to 1899 1691:Knowledge:naming conventions 1638:18:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC) 1595:08:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC) 1558:11:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC) 1536:01:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC) 1518:00:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC) 1490:22:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC) 1476:22:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC) 707:- the NC guideline is about 508:17:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 455:17:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 446:(see template on top of the 424:17:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 4369:Siege of Syracuse (877–878) 4313:Siege of Calais (1346–1347) 4285:Mudéjar revolt of 1264–1266 4149:, with date range in title 4140:#Year ranges as page titles 4011:titles of a work. Thanks, 3784:00:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC) 3750:08:30, 19 August 2016 (UTC) 3737:18:19, 12 August 2016 (UTC) 3701:02:54, 12 August 2016 (UTC) 3642:Azadegan League (1999–2000) 1580:Azadegan League (1999-2000) 1525:Knowledge:Naming convention 1439:Summer Olympic Games (1920) 1247:changed from a redirect to 1212:changed from a redirect to 604:(in Roman it is 100). Both 356:Summer Olympic Games (1920) 4802: 4299:Siege of Berat (1280–1281) 4270:Janszoon voyage of 1605–06 4169:Condemnations of 1210–1277 4115:03:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC) 3664:Year ranges as page titles 3644:, has been redirecting to 852:12345678987654321 (number) 775:11th millennium and beyond 521:User talk:Francis Schonken 4685:completely disagree with 4676:George Heriot (died 1610) 4208:1292–1294 papal election 4193:1268–1271 papal election 3923:19:46, 20 June 2019 (UTC) 3904:not me but somebody else. 3682:11:43, 11 July 2014 (UTC) 3646:1999–2000 Azadegan League 3535:22:11, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 3284:Note, however, that also 2374:1800–1809, etc.) then it 1676:21:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC) 492:wikipedia:current surveys 466:wikipedia:current surveys 271:wikipedia:current surveys 4088:Symphony No. 104 (Haydn) 3824:13:28, 2 July 2017 (UTC) 3592:15:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 3579:10:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 3565:10:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC) 3549:15:32, 23 May 2009 (UTC) 3514:15:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC) 3486:20:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC) 3452:08:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC) 3436:23:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC) 3379:15:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC) 2401:I'm strongly opposed to 1942:{{seealso|19th century}} 1734:13:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC) 1574:explicitly recommends a 1503:formats ("<event: --> 1370:02:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1350:02:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 968:(number) to redirect to 711:- the rest is topic for 325:(<time indicator: --> 320:intervals is as follows: 121:. He is breaking up the 4373:single multi-year event 4359:single multi-year event 4345:single multi-year event 4331:single multi-year event 4317:single multi-year event 4303:single multi-year event 4289:single multi-year event 4274:single multi-year event 4260:single multi-year event 4246:single multi-year event 4232:single multi-year event 4218:single multi-year event 4203:single multi-year event 4188:single multi-year event 1620:Commas in large numbers 374:Football World Cup 2002 364:Alpine skiing World Cup 340:<time indicator: --> 299:01:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC) 4199:1292–94 papal election 4184:1268–71 papal election 3948:without discussion by 3898: 3741:Wider RfC now open at 3465:would be sufficient.— 3323: 3190:1800s (disambiguation) 3116:? We should post the 1216:to a disambig between 1188:as a disambig between 1175:as a disambig between 1162:as a disambig between 1149:as a disambig between 1136:as a disambig between 1123:as a disambig between 1110:as a disambig between 1097:as a disambig between 1084:as a disambig between 1071:as a disambig between 964:I changed all of the − 763:with my comments after 334:<Name of event: --> 329: 324:<Name of event: --> 222:Drag it to RFC maybe? 4680:WP:NCP#Disambiguating 4567:between 1234 and 1256 3897: 3341:read the page. - Dan 3267:, counting back from 3245:, counting back from 3220: 2414:Category:19th century 2373:500–509, 1800s -: --> 1551:Talk:Basel earthquake 1543:1356 Basel earthquake 556:Overall, looks good! 513:Radiant!s suggestions 321: 103:Article for each date 4256:Gothic War (535–554) 4157:Nature of date range 3039:want to know. - Dan 1699:911 (disambiguation) 1483:1920 Summer Olympics 1443:1920 Summer Olympics 438:Sorry, this isn't a 360:1920 Summer Olympics 109:Topic imported from 4541:should stand, e.g. 4150: 4133:#Articles on events 4120:Daterange in titles 3812:five-digit articles 2471:Actually, redlinks 2149::Category:1900–1909 2143:I mean, why should 1358:should redirect to 1251:to a disambig with 1233:added reference to 862:9876543210 (number) 847:1234567890 (number) 842:1023456789 (number) 616:) is at the same a 490:(also mentioned on 368:Football World Cups 4669:2020–21 NHL season 4145: 3899: 3632:Articles on events 3308:October Revolution 3259:according to the ( 3232:Gregorian calendar 2153:Category:1900-1909 2124:) and categories ( 1880:decade, and there 1866:Nineteenth century 1435:Articles on events 1392:(more or less) to 857:987654321 (number) 837:123456789 (number) 285:Haukur Þorgeirsson 241:And/or discuss at 160:Christopher Parham 4751:COVID-19 pandemic 4531: 4530: 3905: 3859: 3839: 3610:WP:Article Titles 3512: 3483: 3476: 3472: 3433: 3426: 3422: 3333: 3027: 3018: 3017: 2982:Disestablishments 2610: 2586: 2286:For that matter, 1801: 1505:" this time, for 1455:. If you look at 1374:Except in slang, 1063:I reverted these. 874:Pandigital number 812:Category:Thousand 410:or <event: --> 382:1982 World's Fair 184:February 27, 2003 139:Special:Longpages 119:February 27, 2003 100: 99: 16:(Redirected from 4793: 4755:Francis Schonken 4729:Francis Schonken 4706:Francis Schonken 4693: 4689: 4640: 4636: 4631: 4630:Foo of 1234–1256 4626: 4613: 4609: 4602: 4584: 4579: 4572: 4568: 4564: 4560: 4556: 4151: 4137:Francis Schonken 4111: 4106: 4101: 4068: 4061: 3915: 3912: 3903: 3872: 3857: 3855: 3846: 3837: 3782: 3774: 3735: 3727: 3712: 3674:Francis Schonken 3534: 3508: 3503: 3497: 3481: 3474: 3470: 3431: 3424: 3420: 3329: 3275:) for the years 3249:, for the years 3125: 3119: 3023: 3010: 3003: 2996: 2800: 2793: 2787: 2753: 2650: 2644: 2640: 2634: 2604: 2582: 2484: 2478: 2155:(with a hyphen). 1797: 1792: 1786: 1547:Basel earthquake 1515:Francis Schonken 1504:of <year: --> 1420: 1415: 1405:Standard format? 1391: 1385: 822:Category:Billion 817:Category:Million 730:Francis Schonken 655:Francis Schonken 568: 505:Francis Schonken 452:Francis Schonken 437: 370:, <event: --> 312:states: (quote) 275:Francis Schonken 234: 199:27 February 2003 150:This came up on 95: 46: 38: 21: 4801: 4800: 4796: 4795: 4794: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4771: 4625:Foo (1234–1256) 4583:Foo (1234–1256) 4122: 4109: 4104: 4099: 4079: 4066: 4059: 4049: 3930: 3913: 3910: 3892: 3866: 3851: 3848: 3842: 3831: 3800:n00000 (number) 3792: 3772: 3768: 3760:. Thank you, — 3743:Talk:1#RFC1-100 3725: 3721: 3706: 3689: 3666: 3634: 3606: 3533:DerbyCountyinNZ 3532: 3506:Septentrionalis 3501: 3495: 3389: 3327:Septentrionalis 3290:Julian calendar 3265:Julian calendar 3243:Julian calendar 3234:for years from 3216: 3123: 3117: 3021:Septentrionalis 3014: 2791: 2785: 2782:where we use it 2749: 2648: 2642: 2638: 2632: 2580:Septentrionalis 2482: 2476: 1982:are definitely 1795:Septentrionalis 1790: 1784: 1741: 1712:Please discuss 1683: 1645: 1622: 1570:I noticed that 1568: 1431: 1413: 1411: 1407: 1389: 1383: 771:292,277,026,596 760:means redirect) 743: 668: 565: 515: 434: 372:is used, as in 306: 231: 105: 96: 90: 51: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 4799: 4797: 4770: 4767: 4766: 4765: 4739: 4716: 4698: 4697: 4696: 4692:Foo after 1234 4688:Foo since 1234 4683: 4672: 4654:Any comments? 4652: 4651: 4650: 4649: 4648: 4647: 4643: 4642: 4632: 4627: 4619: 4618: 4617: 4616: 4615: 4612:Foo after 1234 4608:Foo since 1234 4604: 4578:Foo, 1234–1256 4547: 4529: 4528: 4525: 4523: 4520: 4514: 4513: 4510: 4508: 4505: 4499: 4498: 4495: 4492: 4489: 4483: 4482: 4480: 4478: 4475: 4469: 4468: 4465: 4463: 4460: 4454: 4453: 4450: 4448: 4445: 4439: 4438: 4435: 4433: 4430: 4424: 4423: 4420: 4418: 4415: 4409: 4408: 4405: 4403: 4400: 4394: 4393: 4391: 4388: 4385: 4379: 4378: 4376: 4374: 4371: 4365: 4364: 4362: 4360: 4357: 4351: 4350: 4348: 4346: 4343: 4337: 4336: 4334: 4332: 4329: 4323: 4322: 4320: 4318: 4315: 4309: 4308: 4306: 4304: 4301: 4295: 4294: 4292: 4290: 4287: 4281: 4280: 4277: 4275: 4272: 4266: 4265: 4263: 4261: 4258: 4252: 4251: 4249: 4247: 4244: 4238: 4237: 4235: 4233: 4230: 4224: 4223: 4221: 4219: 4216: 4210: 4209: 4206: 4204: 4201: 4195: 4194: 4191: 4189: 4186: 4180: 4179: 4177: 4174: 4171: 4165: 4164: 4161: 4158: 4155: 4121: 4118: 4092:WP:MUSICSERIES 4078: 4075: 4048: 4045: 4044: 4043: 3988: 3987: 3984: 3946:recently moved 3929: 3926: 3891: 3888: 3887: 3886: 3840: 3830: 3827: 3791: 3788: 3787: 3786: 3752: 3739: 3688: 3685: 3665: 3662: 3633: 3630: 3605: 3602: 3601: 3600: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3405:2000s (decade) 3397:talk:2000–2009 3388: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3353: 3322: 3321: 3320: 3319: 3304: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3257: 3239: 3215: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3186:Talk:1800–1809 3168:Talk:1800–1809 3126:template (see 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3051: 3016: 3015: 3013: 3012: 3005: 2998: 2990: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2979: 2977:Establishments 2973: 2972: 2967: 2962: 2954: 2953: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2941: 2936: 2931: 2926: 2920: 2919: 2914: 2909: 2904: 2899: 2891: 2890: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2876: 2871: 2864: 2859: 2851: 2850: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2836: 2829: 2821: 2820: 2814: 2813: 2811:2nd millennium 2807: 2806: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2576:Hungry Forties 2534: 2501: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2432: 2427: 2422: 2406: 2350: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2284: 2245: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2159: 2156: 2145:1900s in games 2141: 2126:Category:1900s 2102: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2039: 2016: 2015: 2014: 1960: 1959: 1953: 1948:may refer to: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1897: 1896: 1861: 1860: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1824: 1806: 1805: 1780: 1779: 1740: 1737: 1682: 1679: 1644: 1641: 1621: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1567: 1564: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1560: 1493: 1492: 1430: 1427: 1406: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1335: 1334: 1323: 1322: 1316: 1310: 1304: 1297: 1296: 1288: 1287: 1281: 1275: 1269: 1263: 1257:6th millennium 1253:5th millennium 1242: 1235:5th millennium 1228: 1206: 1205: 1197: 1196: 1183: 1170: 1157: 1144: 1131: 1118: 1105: 1092: 1079: 1065: 1064: 1060: 1059: 1045: 1031: 1017: 1016: 1012: 1011: 1002: 993: 984: 974: 973: 961: 960: 951: 942: 933: 924: 915: 906: 897: 888: 878: 877: 865: 864: 859: 854: 849: 844: 839: 833: 832: 825: 824: 819: 814: 807: 805: 804: 800: 799: 787: 786: 778: 777: 767: 766: 764: 761: 742: 737: 736: 735: 726: 725: 724: 717:Knowledge:Eras 701: 695:Knowledge:Eras 667: 664: 663: 662: 661: 660: 642: 586: 574: 573: 554: 551: 548:Roman numerals 544: 537:March 18, 2001 526: 525: 514: 511: 501: 500: 495: 460:FYI, there is 458: 457: 431: 430: 417: 416: 413: 409:<event: --> 406: 403: 354:. The article 353:<event: --> 350: 349: 348: 347: 346:in most cases. 337: 305: 302: 281: 280: 239: 219: 218: 217: 216: 215: 214: 213: 212: 202: 195: 173: 172: 171: 170: 169: 168: 115: 114: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 88: 86: 83: 82: 81: 80: 75: 70: 65: 57: 56: 53: 52: 47: 41: 36: 35: 33:(and archives) 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4798: 4789: 4788: 4784: 4780: 4776: 4768: 4764: 4760: 4756: 4752: 4748: 4744: 4740: 4738: 4734: 4730: 4726: 4721: 4717: 4715: 4711: 4707: 4703: 4699: 4694: 4684: 4681: 4677: 4673: 4670: 4666: 4665: 4663: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4657: 4645: 4644: 4639:1234–1256 Foo 4637:-- should be 4633: 4628: 4623: 4622: 4620: 4614: 4605: 4603: 4598: 4597: 4595: 4594: 4592: 4588: 4580: 4574: 4573: 4552: 4551:MOS:DATERANGE 4548: 4546: 4545: 4540: 4539:WP:COMMONNAME 4536: 4535: 4534: 4526: 4524: 4521: 4519: 4516: 4515: 4511: 4509: 4506: 4504: 4501: 4500: 4496: 4493: 4490: 4488: 4485: 4484: 4481: 4479: 4476: 4474: 4471: 4470: 4466: 4464: 4461: 4459: 4456: 4455: 4451: 4449: 4446: 4444: 4441: 4440: 4436: 4434: 4431: 4429: 4426: 4425: 4421: 4419: 4416: 4414: 4411: 4410: 4406: 4404: 4401: 4399: 4396: 4395: 4392: 4389: 4386: 4384: 4381: 4380: 4377: 4375: 4372: 4370: 4367: 4366: 4363: 4361: 4358: 4356: 4353: 4352: 4349: 4347: 4344: 4342: 4339: 4338: 4335: 4333: 4330: 4328: 4325: 4324: 4321: 4319: 4316: 4314: 4311: 4310: 4307: 4305: 4302: 4300: 4297: 4296: 4293: 4291: 4288: 4286: 4283: 4282: 4278: 4276: 4273: 4271: 4268: 4267: 4264: 4262: 4259: 4257: 4254: 4253: 4250: 4248: 4245: 4243: 4240: 4239: 4236: 4234: 4231: 4229: 4226: 4225: 4222: 4220: 4217: 4215: 4212: 4211: 4207: 4205: 4202: 4200: 4197: 4196: 4192: 4190: 4187: 4185: 4182: 4181: 4178: 4175: 4172: 4170: 4167: 4166: 4162: 4159: 4156: 4154:Current title 4153: 4152: 4148: 4143: 4141: 4138: 4134: 4131: 4127: 4126:WP:NCDURATION 4119: 4117: 4116: 4112: 4107: 4102: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4084: 4076: 4074: 4073: 4069: 4063: 4062: 4060:Crouch, Swale 4054: 4046: 4042: 4038: 4034: 4030: 4025: 4024: 4023: 4022: 4018: 4014: 4010: 4005: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3985: 3982: 3981: 3980: 3977: 3975: 3969: 3965: 3961: 3958: 3955: 3951: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3935: 3927: 3925: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3908: 3896: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3870: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3862: 3856: 3854: 3847: 3845: 3836: 3828: 3826: 3825: 3821: 3817: 3813: 3809: 3805: 3801: 3797: 3789: 3785: 3780: 3777: 3775: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3759: 3758: 3753: 3751: 3748: 3744: 3740: 3738: 3733: 3730: 3728: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3710: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3702: 3699: 3695: 3686: 3684: 3683: 3679: 3675: 3671: 3663: 3661: 3660: 3656: 3652: 3647: 3643: 3639: 3631: 3629: 3628: 3624: 3620: 3615: 3611: 3603: 3593: 3590: 3587: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3576: 3572: 3568: 3567: 3566: 3563: 3560: 3556: 3552: 3551: 3550: 3546: 3542: 3538: 3537: 3536: 3530: 3526: 3515: 3511: 3507: 3500: 3493: 3489: 3488: 3487: 3484: 3480: 3469: 3464: 3460: 3455: 3454: 3453: 3449: 3445: 3440: 3439: 3438: 3437: 3434: 3430: 3419: 3414: 3410: 3406: 3402: 3398: 3394: 3386: 3380: 3376: 3372: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3339: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3317: 3313: 3309: 3305: 3303: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3278: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3256: 3252: 3248: 3244: 3241:according to 3240: 3237: 3233: 3230:according to 3229: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3219: 3213: 3203: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3183: 3182: 3181: 3177: 3173: 3169: 3165: 3161: 3160: 3159: 3155: 3151: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3137: 3133: 3129: 3122: 3115: 3111: 3107: 3103: 3099: 3095: 3091: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3075: 3064: 3060: 3056: 3052: 3050: 3046: 3042: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3011: 3006: 3004: 2999: 2997: 2992: 2991: 2989: 2988: 2983: 2980: 2978: 2975: 2974: 2971: 2968: 2966: 2963: 2961: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2950: 2945: 2942: 2940: 2937: 2935: 2932: 2930: 2927: 2925: 2922: 2921: 2918: 2915: 2913: 2910: 2908: 2905: 2903: 2900: 2898: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2889: 2885: 2880: 2877: 2875: 2872: 2870: 2869: 2865: 2863: 2860: 2858: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2849: 2845: 2840: 2837: 2835: 2834: 2830: 2828: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2819: 2815: 2812: 2809: 2808: 2805: 2801: 2798: 2796: 2790: 2783: 2774: 2770: 2766: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2757: 2754: 2752: 2746: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2700: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2669: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2647: 2637: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2609: 2608: 2602: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2567: 2563: 2558: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2520: 2519: 2518: 2515: 2512: 2508: 2503: 2502: 2495: 2492: 2489: 2481: 2474: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2447: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2433: 2431: 2428: 2426: 2423: 2421: 2418: 2417: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2404: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2377: 2371: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2318: 2314: 2309: 2305: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2296: 2293: 2289: 2285: 2283: 2280: 2277: 2273: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2246: 2244: 2240: 2236: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2223: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2201: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2167: 2164: 2160: 2157: 2154: 2150: 2146: 2142: 2139: 2135: 2131: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2112: 2108: 2094: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2047: 2044: 2040: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2005: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1980: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1973: 1969: 1965: 1957: 1954: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1947: 1943: 1940: 1938: 1934: 1925: 1924: 1920: 1916: 1911: 1906: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1875: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1862: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1846: 1841: 1837: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1789: 1782: 1781: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1738: 1736: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1726:69.140.152.55 1723: 1722: 1717: 1716: 1710: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1688: 1680: 1678: 1677: 1674: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1642: 1640: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1627: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1607: 1603: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1596: 1593: 1592:71.41.210.146 1589: 1585: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1565: 1559: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1502: 1498: 1491: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1452: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1428: 1426: 1425: 1422: 1419: 1416: 1404: 1395: 1388: 1381: 1377: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1368: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1337: 1336: 1332: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1321: 1317: 1315: 1311: 1309: 1305: 1303: 1299: 1298: 1294: 1290: 1289: 1285: 1282: 1279: 1276: 1273: 1270: 1267: 1264: 1262: 1261:5000 (number) 1258: 1254: 1250: 1249:5000 (number) 1246: 1243: 1240: 1239:4000 (number) 1236: 1232: 1229: 1227: 1226:2100 (number) 1223: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1208: 1207: 1204: 1203: 1199: 1198: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1184: 1182: 1178: 1174: 1171: 1169: 1165: 1161: 1158: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1145: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1132: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1119: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1106: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1093: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1080: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1067: 1066: 1062: 1061: 1058:(wrong again) 1057: 1053: 1049: 1046: 1043: 1039: 1035: 1032: 1030: 1026: 1023:changed from 1022: 1019: 1018: 1014: 1013: 1010: 1006: 1003: 1001: 997: 996:1st decade AD 994: 992: 988: 985: 983: 979: 976: 975: 971: 967: 963: 962: 959: 955: 952: 950: 946: 943: 941: 937: 934: 932: 928: 925: 923: 919: 916: 914: 910: 907: 905: 901: 898: 896: 892: 889: 887: 883: 880: 879: 875: 871: 867: 866: 863: 860: 858: 855: 853: 850: 848: 845: 843: 840: 838: 835: 834: 831: 827: 826: 823: 820: 818: 815: 813: 810: 809: 808: 802: 801: 797: 793: 789: 788: 784: 780: 779: 776: 772: 769: 768: 765: 762: 758: 757: 756: 753: 752: 748: 741: 738: 734: 731: 727: 722: 718: 714: 710: 706: 702: 699: 698: 696: 692: 691: 690: 689: 685: 681: 677: 673: 665: 659: 656: 651: 647: 643: 640: 636: 632: 631:2006 (number) 628: 623: 619: 615: 611: 607: 603: 599: 595: 591: 587: 584: 583: 580: 576: 575: 572: 569: 562: 559: 555: 552: 549: 545: 542: 538: 534: 533: 532: 530: 524: 522: 517: 516: 512: 510: 509: 506: 499: 496: 493: 489: 486: 485: 484: 482: 477: 475: 471: 467: 463: 456: 453: 449: 445: 441: 436: 433: 432: 428: 427: 426: 425: 422: 414: 411:<year: --> 407: 404: 401: 400: 399: 396: 393: 391: 387: 383: 379: 375: 371:<year: --> 369: 365: 361: 357: 345: 341: 338: 335: 332: 331: 328: 327: 319: 315: 314: 313: 311: 301: 300: 297: 293: 290: 287: 286: 279: 276: 272: 268: 264: 260: 256: 252: 248: 244: 240: 238: 235: 228: 225: 221: 220: 211: 208: 203: 200: 196: 193: 189: 185: 181: 180: 179: 178: 177: 176: 175: 174: 167: 164: 161: 157: 153: 149: 148: 147: 144: 140: 136: 135: 134: 133: 132: 131: 128: 124: 123:February 2003 120: 113: 112: 107: 106: 102: 85: 84: 79: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 64: 61: 60: 59: 58: 55: 54: 50: 45: 40: 39: 34: 32: 27: 26: 19: 4772: 4702:WP:RULECRUFT 4686: 4653: 4606: 4599: 4575: 4563:1234 to 1256 4542: 4532: 4123: 4081:There is an 4080: 4057: 4050: 4008: 3989: 3978: 3968:User:FULBERT 3956: 3931: 3900: 3852: 3843: 3832: 3807: 3803: 3799: 3793: 3770: 3763: 3762: 3756: 3723: 3716: 3715: 3690: 3667: 3635: 3607: 3586:Arthur Rubin 3559:Arthur Rubin 3554: 3522: 3478: 3467: 3428: 3417: 3412: 3408: 3404: 3400: 3390: 3347:send/receive 3324: 3301: 3297: 3289: 3285: 3221: 3217: 3198:send/receive 3176:send/receive 3136:send/receive 3071: 3045:send/receive 3019: 2866: 2839:20th century 2833:19th century 2831: 2827:18th century 2794: 2781: 2779: 2769:send/receive 2755: 2748: 2714:send/receive 2687:19th century 2677:send/receive 2646:Decadebox BC 2623:send/receive 2606: 2598: 2546:send/receive 2511:Arthur Rubin 2488:Arthur Rubin 2472: 2454: 2443:Arthur Rubin 2416:containing: 2409: 2375: 2369: 2361: 2351: 2335:send/receive 2317:send/receive 2307: 2292:Arthur Rubin 2276:Arthur Rubin 2271: 2239:send/receive 2184:send/receive 2163:Arthur Rubin 2133: 2129: 2103: 2089:send/receive 2075:send/receive 2043:Arthur Rubin 2035: 2019: 2008:send/receive 1983: 1972:send/receive 1961: 1945: 1944: 1941: 1930: 1919:send/receive 1902: 1881: 1827: 1818:send/receive 1773:send/receive 1742: 1720: 1714: 1711: 1684: 1665:User:Sceptre 1646: 1623: 1569: 1506: 1500: 1494: 1448: 1432: 1408: 1362:rather than 1343:Arthur Rubin 1338: 1324: 1292: 1222:22nd century 1218:21st century 1214:21st century 1201: 1200: 1190:−10 (number) 969: 965: 954:−10 (number) 806: 790:edited both 754: 750: 744: 720: 708: 669: 637:to the year 633:though, nor 613: 605: 601: 600:it can mean 593: 578: 527: 518: 502: 480: 478: 473: 459: 443: 439: 435: 418: 397: 394: 351: 343: 339: 333: 323: 322: 317: 309: 308:The current 307: 294: 291: 288: 282: 266: 258: 254: 245:- I started 242: 207:Gene Nygaard 155: 116: 108: 48: 28: 4749:apart from 4725:WP:CRITERIA 4635:1234–56 Foo 4601:Foo to 1256 4083:ongoing RfC 4004:common name 3938:Intel 80386 2751:SMcCandlish 2607:The Duke of 2034:, so those 1669:User:Foogod 1394:10 (number) 1360:10 (number) 1241:to disambig 1177:−9 (number) 1164:−8 (number) 1151:−7 (number) 1138:−6 (number) 1125:−5 (number) 1112:−4 (number) 1099:−3 (number) 1086:−2 (number) 1073:-1 (number) 1052:10 (number) 945:−9 (number) 936:−8 (number) 927:−7 (number) 918:−6 (number) 909:−5 (number) 900:−4 (number) 891:−3 (number) 882:−2 (number) 740:User:Hoof38 612:(Roman for 598:hexagesimal 543:in general? 188:February 27 186:instead of 4656:jnestorius 3619:Mike Cline 3531:. Cheers, 3510:PMAnderson 3442:meaning?-- 3331:PMAnderson 3316:November 7 3312:October 25 3279:and older. 3078:Talk:1800s 3025:PMAnderson 2970:By country 2952:Categories 2804:Millennium 2584:PMAnderson 2522:results.-- 2206:, doesn't 2059:109–100 BC 1933:WP:SELFREF 1799:PMAnderson 1703:911 (year) 1555:Carcharoth 1533:Carcharoth 1487:Carcharoth 1473:Carcharoth 1038:2 (number) 1025:1 (number) 987:1st decade 781:(still on 29:See also: 4682:guideline 4571:1234 – 56 4555:1234–1256 3974:Five Whys 3964:Five Whys 3934:Form 1040 3890:RM on 911 3499:decadebox 3463:2000–2009 3459:1900–1909 3401:2000–2009 3318:articles. 3273:year zero 3271:(without 3261:proleptic 3121:multimove 3102:1800–1809 3084:), or at 2818:Centuries 2789:decadebox 2636:Decadebox 2420:1800–1809 2304:WP:NOT#OR 2231:1900–1909 1956:1800–1809 1910:WP:NOTLEX 1788:decadebox 1749:1800–1809 1689:to amend 1673:Random832 1507:elections 1387:otheruses 440:guideline 390:Expo 2005 310:guideline 78:Archive 2 63:Archive 1 4160:Comments 4029:Mathglot 4013:Mathglot 3960:contribs 3571:Kotniski 3541:*Dan T.* 3444:Kotniski 3371:*Dan T.* 3357:Kotniski 3314:and the 3214:Footnote 3192:. - Dan 3170:. - Dan 3150:Kotniski 3108:through 3100:page to 3055:Kotniski 2725:Kotniski 2695:Kotniski 2653:Kotniski 2562:*Dan T.* 2524:Kotniski 2480:PAGENAME 2459:Kotniski 2388:Kotniski 2250:Kotniski 2233:. - Dan 2212:*Dan T.* 2107:Kotniski 1988:Kotniski 1958:, rarely 1886:*Dan T.* 1850:NerdyNSK 1832:Kotniski 1753:Kotniski 1707:Talk:911 1582:, while 1295:, but... 596:, as in 577:Re. the 541:March 18 483:status: 481:proposed 476:either. 474:proposal 444:proposal 378:Expo '70 127:SGBailey 49:Archives 4559:1234–56 4096:King of 4033:FULBERT 3764:Andy W. 3717:Andy W. 3492:100-109 2848:Decades 2756:‹(-¿-)› 2723:that.-- 2601:Waltham 2327:WP:NAME 2055:100s BC 2032:100s BC 1739:Decades 1687:propose 1602:WP:DASH 1584:WP:DASH 1418:iva1979 978:Year −1 759:(-: --> 672:Talrias 606:numeric 594:numeral 579:general 386:Expo 67 330:Where: 318:regular 296:RandomP 259:numbers 4779:Jc3s5h 4720:WP:RMs 4664:IMHO, 4557:, not 4130:Neelix 3942:5 Whys 3919:en-2.5 3876:Ixfd64 3816:Certes 3804:n0,000 3651:Neelix 3617:RFC.-- 3589:(talk) 3562:(talk) 3555:before 3343:Dank55 3292:, see 3194:Dank55 3172:Dank55 3148:go).-- 3132:Dank55 3090:WT:MOS 3086:WP:VPP 3041:Dank55 2965:Deaths 2960:Births 2765:Dank55 2710:Dank55 2673:Dank55 2619:Dank55 2542:Dank55 2514:(talk) 2509:". — 2491:(talk) 2446:(talk) 2403:1–9 AD 2384:1–9 AD 2352:About 2331:Dank55 2313:Dank55 2295:(talk) 2279:(talk) 2235:Dank55 2180:Dank55 2166:(talk) 2147:be in 2085:Dank55 2071:Dank55 2046:(talk) 2036:do not 2004:Dank55 1968:Dank55 1915:Dank55 1814:Dank55 1769:Dank55 1576:hyphen 1367:Hoof38 1347:(talk) 1318:-: --> 1312:-: --> 1306:-: --> 1300:-: --> 1259:, and 1224:, and 1042:second 1007:-: --> 998:-: --> 989:-: --> 980:-: --> 956:-: --> 947:-: --> 938:-: --> 929:-: --> 920:-: --> 911:-: --> 902:-: --> 893:-: --> 884:-: --> 870:WP:AfD 830:WP:CfD 796:10,000 783:WP:RfD 773:-: --> 715:: the 666:BC/BCE 561:adiant 519:From: 366:. For 227:adiant 163:(talk) 156:before 143:SimonP 4031:.--- 3992:WP:AT 3962:) to 3950:Lmatt 3914:hotch 3808:n0000 3413:XXXXs 3409:2000s 3393:above 3286:after 3164:WP:RM 3128:WP:RM 3110:1900s 3098:1800s 3094:1800s 3082:WP:RM 3074:WP:RM 2888:Years 2879:1820s 2874:1810s 2868:1800s 2862:1790s 2857:1780s 2691:1800s 2668:1800s 2557:1890s 2538:1900s 2507:WP:OR 2455:first 2435:1830s 2430:1820s 2425:1810s 2410:first 2308:1800s 2227:1900s 2208:2000s 2204:2010s 2200:1990s 2196:1980s 2176:1800s 2134:1900s 2130:1900s 2122:1900s 2067:1900s 2063:1800s 2030:, or 2020:first 1964:1800s 1946:1800s 1937:1800s 1905:1800s 1882:still 1878:2000s 1874:1790s 1870:1810s 1745:1800s 1380:tenth 1364:tenth 1331:clock 1325:etc. 1194:11 BC 1181:10 BC 1056:tenth 1050:from 1036:from 1029:first 1009:0s BC 792:10000 567:|< 566:: --> 429:Notes 421:Mkill 255:dates 233:|< 232:: --> 68:Poll2 4783:talk 4759:talk 4733:talk 4710:talk 4581:not 4135:and 4067:talk 4051:See 4037:talk 4017:talk 3996:MOS: 3994:and 3954:talk 3880:talk 3820:talk 3773:talk 3757:here 3745:. — 3726:talk 3696:. — 3678:talk 3655:talk 3623:talk 3575:talk 3545:talk 3525:2009 3471:RAZY 3461:and 3448:talk 3421:RAZY 3375:talk 3361:talk 3277:1 BC 3255:1581 3247:1582 3236:1582 3154:talk 3106:100s 3059:talk 2944:1809 2939:1808 2934:1807 2929:1806 2924:1805 2917:1804 2912:1803 2907:1802 2902:1801 2897:1800 2795:must 2729:talk 2699:talk 2657:talk 2641:and 2566:talk 2528:talk 2473:will 2463:talk 2392:talk 2386:).-- 2376:will 2362:some 2356:and 2302:Per 2288:510s 2254:talk 2216:talk 2202:and 2198:and 2111:talk 1992:talk 1890:talk 1854:talk 1836:talk 1828:only 1757:talk 1730:talk 1721:here 1715:here 1667:and 1661:78xx 1659:(to 1657:7805 1653:6502 1649:4004 1634:talk 1630:UBeR 1628:. ~ 1610:talk 1606:Ayla 1501:more 1376:10th 1356:10th 1339:Help 1320:hour 1314:hour 1308:hour 1302:hour 1286:etc. 1284:9000 1280:etc. 1278:8000 1274:etc. 1272:7000 1268:etc. 1266:6000 1245:5000 1237:and 1231:4000 1210:2100 1202:Why? 1192:and 1179:and 1168:9 BC 1166:and 1155:8 BC 1153:and 1142:7 BC 1140:and 1129:6 BC 1127:and 1116:5 BC 1114:and 1103:4 BC 1101:and 1090:3 BC 1088:and 1077:2 BC 1075:and 1048:10th 982:2 BC 868:(On 794:and 749:and 693:Re. 627:MMVI 344:year 273:. -- 257:and 192:2003 73:Poll 4690:or 4610:or 4569:or 4565:or 4561:or 4553:be 4070:) 4009:not 3966:. 3936:or 3921:). 3806:or 3802:to 3779:ctb 3747:JFG 3732:ctb 3709:JFG 3698:JFG 3482:ANE 3432:ANE 3403:to 3298:not 3253:to 3238:on; 3088:or 2380:1–9 2358:10s 2272:all 2268:10s 2266:or 2028:00s 1984:not 1718:or 1697:to 1695:911 1446:--> 1345:| 1186:−10 1054:to 1040:to 1034:2nd 1027:to 1021:1st 1005:−0s 828:on 635:VII 629:to 622:MIX 618:TLA 614:199 610:CIC 419:-- 4785:) 4777:. 4761:) 4735:) 4712:) 4593:? 4142:. 4113:♠ 4039:) 4019:) 3976:. 3911:Tb 3882:) 3874:-- 3869:MX 3849:• 3835:MX 3822:) 3814:. 3680:) 3672:-- 3657:) 3625:) 3577:) 3547:) 3502:}} 3496:{{ 3477:)` 3475:lN 3473:`( 3450:) 3427:)` 3425:lN 3423:`( 3377:) 3363:) 3349:) 3263:) 3200:) 3178:) 3156:) 3138:) 3124:}} 3118:{{ 3114:0s 3061:) 3047:) 2792:}} 2786:{{ 2771:) 2731:) 2716:) 2701:) 2679:) 2659:) 2649:}} 2643:{{ 2639:}} 2633:{{ 2625:) 2603:, 2568:) 2548:) 2530:) 2483:}} 2477:{{ 2465:) 2394:) 2370:in 2366:0s 2354:0s 2337:) 2319:) 2264:0s 2256:) 2241:) 2222:s 2218:) 2186:) 2113:) 2091:) 2077:) 2065:, 2026:, 2024:0s 2010:) 1994:) 1974:) 1921:) 1892:) 1872:, 1856:) 1838:) 1820:) 1791:}} 1785:{{ 1775:) 1759:) 1732:) 1724:. 1685:I 1655:, 1651:, 1636:) 1612:) 1604:. 1390:}} 1384:{{ 1341:— 1255:, 1220:, 1173:−9 1160:−8 1147:−7 1134:−6 1121:−5 1108:−4 1095:−3 1082:−2 1069:−1 1000:0s 991:0s 785:.) 728:-- 697:: 686:) 682:| 678:| 602:12 392:. 388:, 384:, 380:, 190:, 4781:( 4757:( 4731:( 4708:( 4387:? 4110:♣ 4105:♦ 4100:♥ 4064:( 4035:( 4015:( 3957:· 3952:( 3917:( 3907:© 3878:( 3871:: 3867:@ 3858:) 3853:✎ 3844:✉ 3838:( 3818:( 3781:) 3776:· 3769:( 3734:) 3729:· 3722:( 3711:: 3707:@ 3676:( 3653:( 3621:( 3573:( 3543:( 3479:S 3468:C 3446:( 3429:S 3418:C 3373:( 3359:( 3345:( 3269:1 3251:1 3196:( 3174:( 3152:( 3134:( 3057:( 3043:( 3009:e 3002:t 2995:v 2767:( 2727:( 2712:( 2697:( 2675:( 2655:( 2621:( 2564:( 2544:( 2526:( 2461:( 2390:( 2333:( 2315:( 2252:( 2237:( 2214:( 2182:( 2109:( 2087:( 2073:( 2006:( 1990:( 1970:( 1917:( 1888:( 1852:( 1834:( 1816:( 1771:( 1755:( 1728:( 1632:( 1608:( 1449:" 1414:S 1396:. 1333:. 970:n 966:n 876:) 723:. 684:c 680:e 676:t 674:( 639:7 590:C 564:_ 558:R 523:: 494:) 326:) 230:_ 224:R 201:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) - Knowledge

Index