Jump to content

Help talk:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dineshsenguttvan (talk | contribs) at 14:43, 30 October 2019 (History). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

ELLLAI KALLI AMMAN TEMPLE VILLUPURAM


Ellai kali Amman temple Villupuram

1980 the temple has a founded by Villupuram Nattamai Sekar

And it's has been maintained by Kannan on the period of 1998-2015 [

Now a day the temple has been maintained by Senguttuvan

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
@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)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2019

Prospectuses of north america Lord Sir King Luis32nd (talk) 19:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 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)[reply]

Ellai kali Amman temple

This temple has been very famous on that sourrending place near salamedu The temple has been stated on 1981 Villupuram Nattamai Sekar was a founded of temple On 1998 to 2015 temple was maintained by Kannan... 2015 to temple has been maintained by Senguttuvan Dineshsenguttvan (talk) 14:40, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]