|
|
| (14 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| == Cat. cap. ==
| | {{archive box| |
| | * [[User talk:Lquilter/Archive 1|Archive 1]] |
| | }} |
|
| |
|
| Are you going to change *all* the entries about publications to lower-case "p"s for publications? That's going to take a while unless you have a robot to do it for you. There must be close to a thousand of those already. I was more or less going with the logic that only the first word of a category should be capitalised, unless they're names of things, like Star Trek or Star Wars, or they begin by a number, like the Year + Publication format, in which case the first word after the number'd be capitalised. What do you think? --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:40, 11 February 2007 (PST)
| |
|
| |
|
| : Yep, that's the rule I think is best; and it's sort of a standard from wikipedia. ... I was just going to do them all slowly, but maybe I should look for a bot to install. --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 18:41, 11 February 2007 (PST)
| |
|
| |
|
| :: So, no exceptions for categories beginning with years? --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:43, 11 February 2007 (PST) | | * User:Lquilterjuly05 ... created 06/28. confirmed as of 7/5? |
| | * User:Lquilterjuly05b ... created 06/28. confirmed email 07/05. |
|
| |
|
| ::: Oh, sorry - I was reading too fast & missed the point of your comment. Umm, I don't know. What's the rationale for capping P in 19xx Publication? I'm not opposed to it, I was just going to default to the wikipedia rules for standardization. Also lowercase is easier to type and it is sort of the second word. What makes you think it's better to do it with the cap-X? --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 18:46, 11 February 2007 (PST)
| | == [[Heidi Wyss]] == |
|
| |
|
| :::: The rationale is -- stay the course, because it'll be a bother to go back and fix everything that's been done already if you choose to do things differently. Nothing more rational''-no-e'' than that. It *would* be easier to type lowercase, so I can see the value of adopting that standard in the future. --[[User:Ide Cyan|Ide Cyan]] 18:58, 11 February 2007 (PST)
| | Hi, could you please unprotected the article? Thanks.[[User:Kolobok|Kolobok]] 13:13, 13 December 2011 (PST) |
| | |
| ::::: I take your point. Maybe, we keep doing the X Publications & others until I get a bot up & running for mass search-and-replace. But do you think, stay the course on the ''standard'', such as it is, or stay the course on the existing categories? I can see reasons for both: the standard to keep things consistent so there's ''some'' rationality in the meantime; or start moving to the other method so we don't have more to do ultimately. --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 19:00, 11 February 2007 (PST)
| |
