Talk:Sessions of the Senate (Nova Roma) - Revision history

Titus Iulius Sabinus: to Albucius.

2010-01-18T18:22:48Z

to Albucius.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:22, 18 January 2010
Line 49:		Line 49:

	You may be tempted, and it may seem to work, but it might make trouble as we upgrade the MediaWiki engine. The guide "[[NovaRoma:Wiki Editing for Romans\|Wiki Editing for Romans]]" tells you how to do most things that you need to do, using only the wiki syntax. Many thanks! [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 06:20, 8 August 2008 (CEST)		You may be tempted, and it may seem to work, but it might make trouble as we upgrade the MediaWiki engine. The guide "[[NovaRoma:Wiki Editing for Romans\|Wiki Editing for Romans]]" tells you how to do most things that you need to do, using only the wiki syntax. Many thanks! [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 06:20, 8 August 2008 (CEST)
		+
		+	* There is one more Senate session during my consulship, in November:
		+	[http://www.novaroma.org/nr/Senate_Vote_November_MMDCCLXI_%28Nova_Roma%29], so, in that year were 6 sessions.[[User:Titus Iulius Sabinus\|Titus Iulius Sabinus]] 19:22, 18 January 2010 (CET)

M. Lucretius Agricola: help info

2008-08-08T04:20:33Z

help info

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:20, 8 August 2008
Line 5:		Line 5:
	I think that this is clear as to the nature of the article (a Senate report) and it uses a minimal date (Roman month name and year AUC) that is enough to establish a rough chronology. If there were another report in the same month it would have been "Senate Vote Februarius MMDCCLXI II (Nova Roma)" or suchlike.		I think that this is clear as to the nature of the article (a Senate report) and it uses a minimal date (Roman month name and year AUC) that is enough to establish a rough chronology. If there were another report in the same month it would have been "Senate Vote Februarius MMDCCLXI II (Nova Roma)" or suchlike.

−	I understand the idea of numbering, but I don't have a date to numbers table, so if the report does not mention the number internally there is no way to match a given report to the session number. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 01:54, 4 August 2008 (CEST)	+	I understand the idea of numbering, but I don't have a "date to numbers" conversion table, so if the report does not mention the number internally there is no way to match a given report to the session number. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 01:54, 4 August 2008 (CEST)
		+
		+	:Let us please discuss the naming issue before much work is done. A key feature of a good naming scheme is that the articles will be easy to link to.
		+
		+	==Formatting reports==
		+
		+	===Special format===
		+
		+	We have a special way to mark things that must not be edited. Anything that you put between
		+
		+	<nowiki><div class="scriptum"></nowiki>
		+
		+	and
		+
		+	<nowiki></div></nowiki>
		+
		+	<div class="scriptum">
		+	will look like this.
		+	</div>
		+
		+	===Automatic heading===
		+
		+	Put this at the top of any page
		+
		+	'''<nowiki>{{Senate Session\|MONTH\|DAY\|YEAR}}</nowiki>'''
		+
		+	where
		+
		+	MONTH = Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec
		+
		+	DAY = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, etc.
		+
		+	YEAR = 1998, 1999, 2000, etc. through 2010.
		+
		+	Additional years will be added in the future.
		+
		+	The template puts an info line at the top and automatically adds
		+
		+	*<nowiki>"[[Category:Senate sessions]]"</nowiki> and
		+	*the correct year category (e.g., <nowiki>"[[Category:MMDCCLI]]"</nowiki>).
		+
		+	===Don't use HTML===
		+
		+	You may be tempted, and it may seem to work, but it might make trouble as we upgrade the MediaWiki engine. The guide "[[NovaRoma:Wiki Editing for Romans\|Wiki Editing for Romans]]" tells you how to do most things that you need to do, using only the wiki syntax. Many thanks! [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola\|Agricola]] 06:20, 8 August 2008 (CEST)

M. Lucretius Agricola: suggestion on naming reports

2008-08-03T23:54:43Z

suggestion on naming reports

New page

==Naming of reports==

This year I settled upon titles such as "Senate Vote Februarius MMDCCLXI (Nova Roma)"

I think that this is clear as to the nature of the article (a Senate report) and it uses a minimal date (Roman month name and year AUC) that is enough to establish a rough chronology. If there were another report in the same month it would have been "Senate Vote Februarius MMDCCLXI II (Nova Roma)" or suchlike.

I understand the idea of numbering, but I don't have a date to numbers table, so if the report does not mention the number internally there is no way to match a given report to the session number. [[User:M. Lucretius Agricola|Agricola]] 01:54, 4 August 2008 (CEST)