NovaRoma talk:Wiki Editing for Romans - Revision history

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Okay.

2006-10-28T13:48:05Z

Okay.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:48, 28 October 2006
Line 28:		Line 28:

	:If we have an article "Macrobius" and you cite him as ([[Macrobius\|Macr.]]. xx) with Macr. being a link to "Macrobius", (i.e., <nowiki>[[Macrobius\|Macr.]]</nowiki>) do note that "Macrobius" will appear as hover text. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 19:36, 27 October 2006 (CDT)		:If we have an article "Macrobius" and you cite him as ([[Macrobius\|Macr.]]. xx) with Macr. being a link to "Macrobius", (i.e., <nowiki>[[Macrobius\|Macr.]]</nowiki>) do note that "Macrobius" will appear as hover text. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 19:36, 27 October 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	::Hmm. Okay, I'll try the in-text method on the 'senate procedures' article and see how it goes.
		+
		+	::- [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 08:48, 28 October 2006 (CDT)

M. Lucretius Agricola: /* Footnotes & references */ yes

2006-10-28T00:36:23Z

Footnotes & references: yes

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:36, 28 October 2006
Line 24:		Line 24:

	- [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 19:02, 27 October 2006 (CDT)		- [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 19:02, 27 October 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	:You are correct. Footnotes are not easy in mediawiki, in-text citation harms the flow, pop-ups are annoying to many (including me). In-text citations are the easiest, and I think the least evil of the options. It is also helpful to have a "References" section at the end, even if there are refs in text, and this section might include full biblio, even ISBNs. People eventually get used to in-text citations, and it is a good thing to get people used to seeing things referenced in that way (or referenced in any way).
		+
		+	:If we have an article "Macrobius" and you cite him as ([[Macrobius\|Macr.]]. xx) with Macr. being a link to "Macrobius", (i.e., <nowiki>[[Macrobius\|Macr.]]</nowiki>) do note that "Macrobius" will appear as hover text. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 19:36, 27 October 2006 (CDT)

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: How to do footnotes?

2006-10-28T00:02:04Z

How to do footnotes?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:02, 28 October 2006
Line 12:		Line 12:

	::::: Sounds like a consensus. I'll make the necessary changes. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 16:26, 27 June 2006 (CDT)		::::: Sounds like a consensus. I'll make the necessary changes. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 16:26, 27 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	==Footnotes & references==
		+
		+	I've mentioned on a couple of occasions that I think it would be a desirable and realistic objective for this website to become, within the next five to ten years, the internet's most useful single resource for the ancient (and modern) Roman republic. That means being fairly academic when we need to be, and that means backing up statements of historical fact with references to sources. So we're going to need a standard format for references.
		+
		+	Having looked [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Citation_styles here] I can see that this is a bit of a problem for wikis. Having little numbers which link to a block of footnotes at the bottom of an article is annoying because it means you keep jumping around. Putting the references in brackets within the text interrupts the flow of the prose and is likely to overload the non-academic reader with unwanted information.
		+
		+	In some ways the ideal option would be to have a little number which would open a mini pop-up window containing the text of the footnote, so you could have both the main text and the note visible at the same time. But that would annoy people who don't like pop-ups, and it may not be technically feasible anyway.
		+
		+	Any thoughts?
		+
		+	- [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 19:02, 27 October 2006 (CDT)

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Agam!

2006-06-27T21:26:57Z

Agam!

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:26, 27 June 2006
Line 10:		Line 10:

	:::: I say "Go for it!". The bots could certainly help, though, of course, they can't get everything, but giving "tinkerers" [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] will help us get it through. I don't forsee any problems other than the ones already mentioned. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:22, 26 June 2006 (CDT)		:::: I say "Go for it!". The bots could certainly help, though, of course, they can't get everything, but giving "tinkerers" [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] will help us get it through. I don't forsee any problems other than the ones already mentioned. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:22, 26 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	::::: Sounds like a consensus. I'll make the necessary changes. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 16:26, 27 June 2006 (CDT)

Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus: /* Italics and Bold */ more agreement

2006-06-26T18:22:58Z

Italics and Bold: more agreement

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:22, 26 June 2006
Line 5:		Line 5:
	: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)		: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

−	::Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)	+	:: Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

	::: I think we can go one better. I think we can make a ''bot'' that we can load up with a Latin wordlist and then unleash on the wiki. It would check for italics and provide them when missing. First: policy. Second: army of 'bots. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|M. Lucretius Agricola]] 07:42, 26 June 2006 (CDT)		::: I think we can go one better. I think we can make a ''bot'' that we can load up with a Latin wordlist and then unleash on the wiki. It would check for italics and provide them when missing. First: policy. Second: army of 'bots. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|M. Lucretius Agricola]] 07:42, 26 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	:::: I say "Go for it!". The bots could certainly help, though, of course, they can't get everything, but giving "tinkerers" [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] will help us get it through. I don't forsee any problems other than the ones already mentioned. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:22, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

M. Lucretius Agricola: bots!

2006-06-26T12:42:46Z

bots!

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:42, 26 June 2006
Line 6:		Line 6:

	::Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)		::Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	::: I think we can go one better. I think we can make a ''bot'' that we can load up with a Latin wordlist and then unleash on the wiki. It would check for italics and provide them when missing. First: policy. Second: army of 'bots. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|M. Lucretius Agricola]] 07:42, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: More chat

2006-06-26T12:11:12Z

More chat

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:11, 26 June 2006
Line 4:		Line 4:

	: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)		: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	::Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus: /* Italics and Bold */ agreement

2006-06-25T18:28:43Z

Italics and Bold: agreement

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:28, 25 June 2006
Line 2:		Line 2:

	This wiki is going to contain lots of Latin words used within non-Latin articles. It would be much easier to read such articles if the Latin words were clearly marked as such. There is already a convention in academic writing that italics are used for words in languages other than the main language of the text. With all that in mind I'd like to suggest that we use italics exclusively for words in languages other than the main language of the article, and make this usage compulsory. This will leave us with only one level of emphasis (bold), but do we really need more than one? [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 11:23, 25 June 2006 (CDT)		This wiki is going to contain lots of Latin words used within non-Latin articles. It would be much easier to read such articles if the Latin words were clearly marked as such. There is already a convention in academic writing that italics are used for words in languages other than the main language of the text. With all that in mind I'd like to suggest that we use italics exclusively for words in languages other than the main language of the article, and make this usage compulsory. This will leave us with only one level of emphasis (bold), but do we really need more than one? [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 11:23, 25 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

Aulus Apollonius Cordus: Suggestion about use of italics in the wiki

2006-06-25T16:23:03Z

Suggestion about use of italics in the wiki

New page

==Italics and Bold==

This wiki is going to contain lots of Latin words used within non-Latin articles. It would be much easier to read such articles if the Latin words were clearly marked as such. There is already a convention in academic writing that italics are used for words in languages other than the main language of the text. With all that in mind I'd like to suggest that we use italics exclusively for words in languages other than the main language of the article, and make this usage compulsory. This will leave us with only one level of emphasis (bold), but do we really need more than one? [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus|Cordus]] 11:23, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:22, 26 June 2006
Line 5:		Line 5:
	: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)		: I don't disagree at all. Making it compulsory won't be easy, particularly in cases where we see "Consuls" in one place and ''Consules'' elsewhere, but it seems a reasonable suggestion. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:28, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

−	::Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)	+	:: Yes, we'll probably never get complete consistency, but we can get close to it by a two-armed strategy: the first is to ask people to follow this policy when editing articles, and the second is to give tinkerers like myself ''carte blanche'' to italicize Latin words in other people's articles. At the moment what's holding me back from doing is that we have no officially stated policy to do it. [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] 07:11, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

	::: I think we can go one better. I think we can make a ''bot'' that we can load up with a Latin wordlist and then unleash on the wiki. It would check for italics and provide them when missing. First: policy. Second: army of 'bots. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|M. Lucretius Agricola]] 07:42, 26 June 2006 (CDT)		::: I think we can go one better. I think we can make a ''bot'' that we can load up with a Latin wordlist and then unleash on the wiki. It would check for italics and provide them when missing. First: policy. Second: army of 'bots. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|M. Lucretius Agricola]] 07:42, 26 June 2006 (CDT)
		+
		+	:::: I say "Go for it!". The bots could certainly help, though, of course, they can't get everything, but giving "tinkerers" [[User:Aulus Apollonius Cordus\|Cordus]] will help us get it through. I don't forsee any problems other than the ones already mentioned. [[User:Quintus Caecilius Metellus Pius Postumianus\|Q. Caecilius Metellus]] 13:22, 26 June 2006 (CDT)