Help talk:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1
Appearance
![]() | This page is not for seeking help or making test edits. It is solely for discussing the Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1 page. for using and editing Wikipedia. For common questions about Wikipedia, see Help:Contents. To make test edits, please use the Sandbox. |
![]() | To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, all "Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor" talk pages redirect here. |
![]() | Feedback from new editors on the tutorial series is collected here. To leave feedback, please . |
![]() | Other talk page banners | |||||||||||||||
|
Content
This page closely mirrors its wikimarkup equivalent. Two subpages (on WP:RS and WP:V) are currently transcluded into both to synchronise them. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 09:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
What are topics Shelja897 (talk) 12:03, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Date format
@Evolution and evolvability: The page says "Note: dates should be YYYY-MM-DD". I've not changed that sentence, but I have doubts as to its validity. For example, WP:VE/UG says nothing about this, nor does the equivalent page for Wiki markup. Could you explain, or point me to a source that says that dates should be so formatted? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:28, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, I added the YYYY-MM-DD note because the
{{CS1}}
template seems to reject a lot of other date formats that people my intuitively attempt (e.g. DD-MM-YYYY or MM/DD/YY). It does accept other though (e.g. DD Month YYYY and YYYY). What we really need is a succinct way to give a couple of examples of acceptable date formats so that users are not put off when they enter a non-accepted one and it gets rejected. This discussion section is the closest thing to a list of accepted/not-accepted that I've seen. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 22:39, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Evolution and evolvability: There's also some information at Help:CS1 errors#bad date and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Things to avoid.
- I guess my concern is more about readability - VE will leave "2015-11-19" as is, in a footnote, but "November 19, 2015", or "19 November 2015" is better from a readability viewpoint. The sentence in question, "Note: dates should be YYYY-MM-DD", seems to be saying that "November 19, 2015" should not be used; that's obviously not true. My feeling is the reverse, in fact: I find "2015-11-19" to be problematical, because I don't think that's what readers want.
- Why not simply say the following?
- "Note: the format for dates should be either Month DD, YYYY; or DD Month YYYY."
- That way, if someone gets an error message within a citation, it's easy for them - looking at the tutorial page - to see how to fix it. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:40, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2019
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Prospectuses of north america Lord Sir King Luis32nd (talk) 19:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 20:13, 2 June 2019 (UTC)