Talk:Bitis parviocula: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Peter J. King
(my formatting (now all reverted))
 
imported>Jaap Winius
Line 6: Line 6:
#To leave in Wikipedia templates that simply show up as red "template" signs is surely undesirable.
#To leave in Wikipedia templates that simply show up as red "template" signs is surely undesirable.
#Why have something in "see also" which is already in the article? --[[User:Peter J. King|Peter J. King]] 09:50, 13 February 2007 (CST)
#Why have something in "see also" which is already in the article? --[[User:Peter J. King|Peter J. King]] 09:50, 13 February 2007 (CST)
:See my answer on your talk page. --[[User:Jaap Winius|Jaap Winius]] 12:21, 13 February 2007 (CST)

Revision as of 13:21, 13 February 2007

My formatting (now all reverted)

My problems were:

  1. To place a "common names" line before the article rather than in the article looks very odd.
  2. To use abbreviations rather than full names of unites is less clear for potential users (as is omitting a link to the relevant article).
  3. To leave in Wikipedia templates that simply show up as red "template" signs is surely undesirable.
  4. Why have something in "see also" which is already in the article? --Peter J. King 09:50, 13 February 2007 (CST)
See my answer on your talk page. --Jaap Winius 12:21, 13 February 2007 (CST)