Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wavelength (talk | contribs) at 19:13, 15 October 2012 (→Purpose: replying with 2 internal links). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Purpose of the Register

So it's a "supplement" to the MoS ... but what the hell is it for? Someone please tell us in the lead? Tony (talk) 10:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Style of contents

After I set up the basic structure of this Register, with headings and subheadings in parallel with those in the Manual of Style, I added some links under "See also", and I added, in the first section, a list of links to past discussions. This style differs from that of contributions in other sections of the Register, which are closer to the style recommended by Noetica, but my style should not dissuade others from continuing their contributions in that style. They might be able to use the links which I have listed in the first section to generate one or more paragraphs similar in style to the ones already added.
-- Wavelength (talk) 00:57, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Curly (directional) quotes

This is the 21st century (now with Unicode!), no longer the typewriter age, when straight quotes were introduced out of meagerness. We really should move to curly quotes (and apostrophe). Those who cannot type them should use the HTML entities ‘ ” etc. – Kaihsu (talk) 08:47, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I am tempted to change the current recommendation to curly quotes. Is this a good idea? – Kaihsu (talk) 20:32, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to discuss the guideline, please start a new section at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style. First, please search the archives for previous discussions about the same guideline.—Wavelength (talk) 17:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Use of in MOS

The link Misplaced Pages:Mos#Article_titles.5BR.5D works, but Misplaced Pages:Mos#Article_titles doesn't. This is because the section has an link to its right. The also - IMHO - messes up the TOC - see Misplaced Pages:Mos.

Could and should anything be done, to improve these IMHO unwanted & undesirable side-effects? Trafford09 (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

A shortcut, similar to WP:HYPHEN, would work.—Wavelength (talk) 22:46, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. How would one use the hyphen, please? Would you give an example?

As for the links, would the hyphen also stop the s being included in the TOC? Trafford09 (talk) 23:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh - I think I see what you mean. But are the s really needed? Trafford09 (talk) 23:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 114#Register.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Junior and Senior in names of people

Is there a standard or style for proper names of people? For example, John Doe (junior) or John Doe (Junior) or John Doe, Junior or the American style John Doe, Jr.? Same for Senior?

See the questionable John Bell (Junior), and I know I will find other examples.--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

If someone here doesn't know, the more obvious place to ask would be Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style. Art LaPella (talk) 19:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I posted here, and then I realized that I was in the wrong place. I am being answered at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style. --DThomsen8 (talk) 19:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Purpose

I pulled this sentence out of the archive "How is a MOS consensus to be recorded, for all editors to see?-- Wavelength (talk) 18:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC)"

That strikes me as an odd question. In the MOS obviously. No one other than a historian cares what the details of the decision were and who discussed it and what they were thinking when they proposed it. We have a page. We record consensus changes in that page by making those changes. We can use an edit summary if we wish. There is always a time stamp in the history and anyone interested can easily go to the archive to find where or when that issue was discussed. But linking to decisions in the MOS itself is not something that I would recommend. I have no problem with treating this page sort of as an index to the archives, but nothing more than that, and not like what we would call a reference in article space. Most of the MOS is there because of common sense, not because of 57 Arbcom rulings. Or 1. And most editors could care less why it says what it does. It is hard enough to try to get them to care about what it says - and follow that advice. Apteva (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I asked that question in a section now archived at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 113#Recording consensus. When I did so, I linked to a revision starting the subsection now archived at Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Archive 112#Proposal to defer discussion of dashes, in which revision Noetica had asked the same question. Those two links provide adequate context to explain the purpose of the Register.

—Wavelength (talk) 19:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC)