Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:21, 3 July 2008

Converting acres to metric

I've noticed you tend to replace conversions from acres to hectares with conversion to km2. I don't understand why this is. Acres are similar in size to hectares, and so make for a good conversion. Ditto miles and km. I think showing conversions of acres to km2 makes for units of sizes that are too dissimilar to make sense. --Phil Holmes (talk) 16:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I will take a look. Can you give me an example? Lightmouse (talk) 18:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

An example of this (which I've reverted) is http://en.wikipedia.org/Martlesham --Phil Holmes (talk) 14:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks. I think it is easier to understand large areas (like 10 square kilometres) using square kilometres rather than hectares. More ordinary people know how long a kilometre is and if you look at a map you will see kilometre grid squares. Comparing units between systems often works but word-for-word translations can sometimes be inappropriate for ordinary people within the target system. Otherwise we would erroneously translate litres of petrol into quarts of gas. That is my what I think anyway. I do not mind if you have a different opinion and your revert is not a problem for me. I appreciate your feedback. Lightmouse (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. In the UK, land is generally sold in acre/hectare size, so it's usual to use these units to describe packages of land. I agree with you that it's difficult to visualise that, but there you go. I would generally use sq. miles/sq km where it's important to visualise the size of larger packages of land. --Phil Holmes (talk) 08:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hectares are the standard equivalent. TONY (talk) 13:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

1. As an aside, land is no longer sold in acres in the UK. According to the Land Registry website, registration went fully metric in 1995. Although a web search reveals the acre is still widely mentioned by estate agents.

2. Phil has hit the nail on the head, the harder-to-visualise hectare is common in source data provided by estate agents, agricultural or other specialist documents. Specialists may find them familiar. This issue, to me, seems analogous with using nanometre and micrometre rather than angstrom and micron. Quotes need special treatment. Otherwise, for lay readers should use units that are easier to visualise: large units for large areas and small units for small areas. Town, county, and country sizes seem right to me when quoted in square kilometres. The hectare is intermediate in size so it is easier to tolerate in the middle sizes but I do not think ordinary British people find the acres or hectares as accessible as the square foot, square mile, square metre or square km.

3. I know that people from Australia may feel more comfortable with it than British people because of increased usage there.

4. As I said above we should take note of 'equivalent units' but be careful with word for word translations for non-specialists. The litre of petrol might appear to translate to quarts of gas but Americans use gas in gallons. The US dry pint of grated carrots would appear to translate into mL but it is non-US recipes use grams of carrots. The french word for teaspoon is cuillère à café not cuillère à thé. Lightmouse (talk) 18:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Conversion accuracy

Discussion moved to: Template_talk:Convert

Please respond to this:

Wikipedia_talk:Templates_for_deletion#Automotive_templates:_Template:Auto_hp_and_others.

incorrect bot update

Just a quick note on this one. The bot recently updated the Grand Trunk Railway article, but the update was incorrect in the formatting used in the infobox. Specifically, it changed "5 ft 6 in" to " ft 5 in". I've fixed it using the {{RailGauge}} template that members of WikiProject Trains have developed (which is an update that's beyond the scope of the bot). Slambo (Speak) 18:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed your edit, then spotted the '5 ft 6 in' error. I had just finished updating the code when I saw your message. Thank you very much for fixing it for me. Your message here is very much appreciated because I could have missed it.

Incidentally, the railgauge template and the convert template do exactly the same thing. There are quite a few templates (e.g. auto templates, 'weight' templates, and 'height' templates) with similar functions. The convert template is a generic one that is very popular. Do you think the rail people would like to join forces with the people at Template talk:Convert? Lightmouse (talk) 18:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

silly rabbit

This user is now adding redundant statement to WP:CONTEXT. See also Wikipedia_talk:Only_make_links_that_are_relevant_to_the_context#Autoformatting_purposes. TONY (talk) 13:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Cathedrals of England

Thankyou, Lightmouse! Amandajm (talk) 13:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

You are very welcome. And it is nice to have good feedback. I appreciate it. Lightmouse (talk) 16:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Lightbot

Why is it unlinking the years in Journey for Margaret and Junior Miss? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)