Jump to content

Wikipedia:Village pump archive 2004-09-26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sannse (talk | contribs) at 15:53, 7 March 2003 (restoring cropped page (more pruning obviously needed!)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

File:Village pump.JPG

Related pages: Mailing lists - IRC - IM a Wikipedian

Welcome, newcomers and baffled oldtimers! If you have a question about Wikipedia and how it works, please place it at the bottom of the list, and someone will attempt to answer it for you. (If you have a question about life, the universe and everything, go to the reference desk instead.)

Before asking a question, check if it's answered by the Wikipedia:FAQ or other pages linked from Wikipedia:Help.

Wikipedia also has a real-time chat channel. Visit Wikipedia IRC channel for more info.

NOTE - questions and answers will not remain on this page indefinitely (otherwise it would very soon become too long to be editable). After a period of time with no further activity, information will be moved to other relevant sections of the wikipedia (such as the FAQ pages) or placed in the Wikipedia:Village pump archive if it is of general interest, or deleted. Please consider dating and titling your discussions so as to facilitate this.

Moved discussion

See the archive for older moved discussion links.

Two questions: How do you add the comments that appear in black on the "recent changes" page? Second, I don't see a link to the village pump on the main page. Is there one I am not seeing? If there is not, can we consider adding one? --Mahongue 05:30 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

For the comments, just fill in the Summary box. Have fun! Danny 05:36 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

So obvious, I never saw it. Thanks, Danny. --Mahongue 05:38 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

I see someone just added the "village pump" link to the main page (or I just now see it). Thank you. --66.47.86.47 12:36 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

Daniel MacKay writes: I get the feeling that there is an enormous and interesting discussion and lots of info about contributing going on in the Wikipedia: "hierarchy". Is this true, and is there a guide to it? Or are there only a few articles?

Wikipedia:Utilities is a good start - the Related Changes button will give a reasonable impression of Recent Changes for the wikipedia hierarchy Martin

I'm pretty sure I already know the answer, since I've already looked at the UNICODE and HTML pages, but I'm asking. Is there any consistant way to indicate dot-under characters in the wiki and in html in general? I know, dot-under's are not part of ISO-Latin-1, but they're an important part of transliterating Persian. It's not uncommon to ignore them, and that's what I have done, but I've tried _hard_ to get the orthography correct on the various Bahá'í stuff I've done, and the lack of the dot-under's is annoying to me. -- thanks in advance (and yes, I know that sometimes the answer is "no". Rick Boatright 05:05 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

The dot under characters are mostly in the "Latin Extended Additional" area of Unicode. Using number codes should do the trick. They fall in the hex range, 1E00-1EFF. Thus Hex 1EA1 = Decimal 7841 gives "&#7841", Hex 1E05 = 7685 gives "&#7685", etc. Eclecticology 07:49 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

WIKIPEDIA DELETION AND LINKING TO OLD VERSIONS 2/24/03 Are previous versions of Wikipedia pages eventually deleted? Could someone theoretically choose to link to a previous version (in case newer versions insistently omitted the data)?

Before February of 2001 the software we had did delete older versions and only kept newer versions. But all versions since have been stored so nothing since then can be permanently lost. --mav
I think it was 2002, not 2001. --Zundark 11:06 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

Under our current software, old revisions of pages are not deleted (unless the page itself is deleted). They should remain forever for future data archaeologists to examine. :) However, there is not yet a reliable way of linking to a particular revision; this is currently under discussion on the wikitech-l developers' mailing list. --Brion 19:43 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)


Edit Disappeared


I discovered that my edit to the article "Three People's Principles" on Feb 16, 2003 is gone. It took me some research and wasn't a really minor edit (it contains 4 or 5 new sentences, if I remember correctly), so the disappearance is quite disappointing. The edit was more info on "San min chu i", the Taiwanese national anthem. I also remember that another edit of the same article in December 2002 also disappeared and I had to redo it again, but at the time I thought it was just me forgetting to save the work.

What's going on? Can the disappearance be restored? --Menchi 03:24 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

Server logs show your IP opening the page for editing at 06:59 on Feb 17 (10:59pm on Feb 16 in PST), but have no record of it being saved (or previewd) that I can find... Hmm, around that time I was running a backup of the server; the wiki would have been in read-only mode for a few minutes. If you saved it at that time though, you should have received a message telling you that the wiki was in read-only mode... --Brion 05:31 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

How do you go about translating a page into another language? Do you have to go into the French/German/Italian wikipedia and create the page again there, or what? Olivia Curtis 18:35 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

yup. -- Tarquin 19:04 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your succinct answer. What do you do next? I've created a new page to match the one in the English wiki, but there still isn't a thing at the top saying 'other languages:' - how do you do that? Olivia Curtis 21:07 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

Did you copy in the interlanguage links? (BTW, it's always best if you can give a link to the page you're working with as an example.) --Brion 21:12 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks - I didn't know about those but have got there now. Olivia Curtis 21:24 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

You have to log in in the other wikipedia separately, then create an article similar to doing that in the English wikipedia. - Patrick 21:35 Feb 25, 2003 (UTC)

I've got a book of copyright free animal illustrations. Would these be of interest, even though they aren't photos? They are pretty correct looking and well drawn. Zanimum

Yes please! Photos would be nice, but good illustrations are a lot better than a page of uninviting text. --Brion 17:09 Feb 26, 2003 (UTC)

ers

Just an idea to keep the developers busy -- can we have a diff function on user contribution pages? Most of the time I use them it's to see if someone's other edits are as questionable as the one that led me there, so I end up having to go to the article, then the history, then find out what he changed specifically. Tuf-Kat

Oh I like. Also good would be a cur link so we can see if someone else has already fixed them. Martin


Is it ok to translate an article from another language Wikipedia to another one? For instance, I was working on translating something from the Spanish Wikipedia to the English one when it occurred to me that I should at least ask about it ... mgmei

Yes, of course it is! Be sure to include an interlanguage link, and it's good form to note the source in the edit summary. --Brion 06:46 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

Why do only sysop have the opportunity to "see" the contents of deleted articles ? Why not a read only option for regular users ?

Well, then they wouldn't be deleted now would they? ;) I am open to changing this if there is demand for it, but it opens other problems. For articles deleted because we cannot distribute them due to copyright, "deletion" that allows anyone walking in off the street to continue to be able to view (=copy) the material would be insufficient to comply with the law; if the copyright owner complains, we must remove it from public access. Thus, we would need to make it easier to remove deleted pages from the deleted page archive -- at which point you've invented another hierarchy and more cabalish ways and paths to abuse. ("Oh yeah, I deleted that because it was copyright infringement. No, you can't look at it -- I had to flush the archive so it wouldn't be available anymore.") --Brion 20:39 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

How about making it a two-step process to do what is currently done. One user can "delink" a page, essentially decoupling it from the main body of the wikipedia but still allowing users to view it, and a second user has to endorse the decision to fully make it unviewable. Susan Mason

Itd be neat if there was a way to see how many times a page had been viewed. Susan Mason

We used to have this feature, but it was turned off because it was slowing things down too much. Enchanter

When I click 'show preview', nothing happens - it just looks exactly the same as when I'm editing. Why is this? Olivia Curtis 22:37 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC).

If you scroll down, you should see a preview of how the page will look underneath the edit box. Enchanter

I'd like to see the warning ("Note: Remember that this is only a preview, and has not yet been saved!") at the bottom of the page, as well as at the top. (I seem to remember that it used to be at the bottom, in fact.) If you're looking at the top of the page, it's obvious that it's a preview, because you can see the word "Preview", and possibly even the edit box itself. If you're looking at the bottom, there is no obvious indication, so you (well, I) might forget. -- Oliver P. 02:57 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

Yes... an easy mistake to make. As a further suggestion, the whole preview could have a distinctive background colour (light green, say), to remind you that it is a preview. Enchanter
And it might be helpful to move the "Save page" and "Show preview" buttons a little apart. With the current setup you could accidentally hit the save button instead of preview, stuffing the database unnecessarily.Kosebamse 11:05 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

If you prefer you can choose to have the preview appear above the edit box (a better arrangement I think). The tick box is in "preferences". The "not saved" warning was moved when this option became available, but really needs to be at the top and bottom to suit people with both arrangements. Personally, I think the preview above the edit box would be better as the default as well - Olivia is certainly not the first to have missed the preview below the edit box :) -- sannse 14:22 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! Olivia Curtis 00:09 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)

Cross-wiki redirects

A simple question. There are certain people, such as Stephen Huczko, who used to have an article on wikipedia, and that article has been moved to the sep11.wiki. I believe that such articles should redirect to the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack/Casualties page. The Cunctator thinks they should redirect to the relevant sep11.wiki page. I dislike cross-wiki redirects, and wondered what the general opinion was on their use. Of course, if there's an appropriate FAQ on the subject, please direct me to it. Thanks! :) Martin

IIRC cross wiki redirects were made for exactly this reason. If the wikipedia tribute pages are made into orphan redirects to the sep11 wiki there should not be a problem. --mav

The problem is that if a page does an inter-wiki redirect then you don't get the "redirected from" link that allows you to remove the redirect, and "What links here" doesn't work across wikis. It can be done, but you need to hack the URL, which is a rather cludgy solution, IMO. Is there a tool/utility page for finding links to pages that redirect off wikipedia? Martin

Memorial Wiki

Problems with the memorial wiki. If someone can give me relevant powers and/or advice on how to solve these myself, that'd be great. Otherwise, I throw myself at the mercy of the technical folks.

  • One cannot search or use the go button, as MySQL returned error "1191: Can't find FULLTEXT index matching the column list".
  • The side links include a "main page" and "current events" and "bug reports" pages. These need to be replaced with "in memoriam", perhaps some other pages.
  • The Help and About link on each page is bust. We probably just need one of these links for now.
  • sep11:Special:Upload has dead links
  • Link as GNU Free Documentation License on each page is broken
  • Discuss this page is unnecessary on a memorial wiki
  • minor edit is currently unnecessary
  • Each page says "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" - it should say something more appropriate ("From the memorial wiki", etc)
  • the logo says Wikipedia... again, it should say something more appropriate
I've fixed the search problem. As far as broken links, fill them in! Where appropriate, copy or link the pages off of this wiki. --Brion 00:04 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)
Ok, I can certainly fill in some info for some of the links I mentioned, but for others the links themselves should be removed. I guess I can add temporary redirects, though, for the time being. Thanks for fixing the search problem :) Martin


Is it possible to move Images the same way as articles? I'm working on the Wikiproject German districts, and there are several maps uploaded in JPG format already which need to be replaced by higher quality PNG ones, thus nearly the same name except the last three letters. Moving the images would be nicer then upload the new map and have the old ones deleted. andy 15:24 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)

Not at present, no. However I'm not sure I see how this would help in your case, as the new images must be uploaded by the nature of the operation... --Brion 19:32 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:votes for deletion

The third paragraph of the page about a page-to-be-deleted is really confusing to me. I would appreciate if someone could explain what it means, or rewire it. Thanks, 129.79.38.163 19:40 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)

What's the standard for NPOV in external links? If one spies an External link in an article that appears to be a personal political rant, is it ok just to leave it there? In this case, I'm referring to a link at the bottom of the Epilepsy article. It was written by a fellow Wikipedian, and seems to have only a faint relationship with the subject matter, but I'm not sure what the "rules" are for such material. Dachshund

One should seek NPOV balance in links the same as one seeks NPOV balance in quotations, citations, and attributions: try to include links to a variety of viewpoints and note what kind of treatment each site gives the subject. That doesn't mean you should link to every nutter with a geocities page, of course; information should be relevant, informative, and useful. --Brion

Is there any sane way to link in a a vector source file for a raster image? How soon will SVG support be added ( http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/SVG_image_support ). My attempt is over at http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image%3AMonopoly_pricing.png Problems are:

  1. Giving a link to the page (currently requires viewing source)
  2. Requires confermation that .fig is not a prefered image method... Jrincayc 14:18 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)
Use a link in the form [[media:filename.ext]] to include a direct link to an uploaded file.
As far as SVG support, it's fairly uncontroversial as far as I know ;) so it'll be added as soon as someone has the combination of the inclination, the ability, and the time to hack it in. At the moment I lack the time, alas; I may get to it later in the month, or I may not. My Wikipedia to-do list is very long. :) If someone else wants to give it a try, they are more than welcome! --Brion 20:34 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

Respect. Perhaps the most mis-used word in the english language, respect is very often used when regard or in regard to is meant. It is often also confused with - honor.

Do a search of wikipedia for respect; you'll see what I mean.

At 15:28 Mar 3, 2003 UTC I added "Calimero" to Anthropomorphism, but soon after that a search for "Calimero" failed to give this article, although when I checked the article the new version with this term was there. Is this perhaps due to a database backup at that time, or an indexing of the database or something like that? That in such a case the search feature is applied to a slightly outdated version of the database? - Patrick 22:02 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

The search index table is updated with delayed inserts. If there is heavy searching activity, the queued updates will wait a bit for activity to lighten up before being actually added. Since search queries are sometimes rather slow, this cuts down on locking problems where additional searches are blocked until the first one finishes, allowing an update to go through. --Brion 23:24 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks, good to know: my reaction was additional searches and edits to find out what the problem was! I updated Wikipedia:Searching. - Patrick 00:27 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

Add an option so one can filter out of the watchlist those pages in which one was the last editor. Susan Mason

That is an excellent idea. I second it if it isn't too hard to implement. --snoyes 23:51 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

Lee Harvey Oswald used the ailas "Alek J. Hidell" during his lifetime. I am torn on creating a new article, a redirect from the Hidell ailas to the Oswald article, or talking about it in the Oswald article. Which is best?

- --Hoshie

Write about it in the article. To also create the redirect is not a bad idea, but I don't think it is in any way necessary either - it's not like someone is likely to ever create the Alek J. Hidell link (except for my creation here and now). Andre Engels 23:46 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

Any possibilities for Wikipedia housing almanac data? Granted it may be better for Nupedia since we probably don't want just anyone fudging statistical data, but it seems to me there is a great need for this data to be publicly accessible and actually searchable such as on the internet. I do not find there are many resources already existing on-line, or they do not necessarily have the full amount of data as the print versions. - Brettz9 18:22 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

I'm not sure just what kind of data you're looking for here, but it sounds like this might be a case for a related side project... You might compare discussion at m:Wikiteer et al. --Brion 19:36 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

Well, it seems at another page I was directed to List of reference tables which seems to have the kind of information I had in mind, but I also suggested the main page reflect an entry such as Atlas to ensure those of us searching for that term would find the data we were seeking. - Brettz9 07:07 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

Any possibilities of linking directly from the main page to the By Alphabetical Order page? It is slow and may be a drain on the server to run these queries, but it is more efficient having such a page than going manually through all pages starting from the beginning of the AllPages search. - Brettz9 18:22 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

An improved alphabetical index version of Allpages is partially implemented, but waiting for installation on improvements. --Brion 19:36 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)
You mean one different than the By Alphabetical Order page we have started? If so, do you mean it has not been installed/is not accessible at all now or that the improvements have not been installed?
Yes. It seems rather silly to maintain a page of arbitrary and ever-shifting index numbers when the machine can do this itself! See mailing list post. --Brion 17:52 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

Are there any plans (or is it already somehow possible) to add customizably-viewed databases (e.g., sorts by different columns on a database within a page), collapsable/expandable outline elements, automatic cross-referencing of data at other pages, etc.? I'm not a programmer, but if there are pages existing on how to do the html code for this (if it can be done in html), I might like to try it out. - Brettz9 18:22 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

Not at this time; this seems to be a wide range of proposed things though! ;) If you'd like to make some more concrete proposals about how to go about doing such things, you're welcome to set up some pages on http://meta.wikipedia.org/ and get some feedback. --Brion
great, thanks for the starting point.

I have not been able to find any Wiki sites dedicated to people starting up their own (non-neutral) projects on any and every topic (preferably with by topic lists and the option to hide projects from searches). Is it just too memory-intensive to house such a service? - Brettz9 18:22 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

Have you looked at SeedWiki? --Brion 19:36 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)
That helped my find what I was looking for, but SeedWiki specifically seemed too specialized. <http://www.swiki.net/> seems like what I was looking for (though there were complaints about it not being accessible.

One more question...Is it conceivable that Wikipedia could be programmed to accept anchors to links internal or external to the given page (whether going somewhere else on Wikipedia or not) (or does it somehow already)? - Brettz9 19:09 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

For internal links, this is a controversial feature. (See recent discussion on the wikipedia-l mailing list.) For external links, should work fine: http://foobar.bizbax/somepage.html#ananchor --Brion
Thanks, but is there any way you could direct me to a recent archived thread or something? There seems to be a vast amount of discussions to sort through (with no way to search) and I didn't seem to find it during the time I tried searching.
By the way, many thanks for all the helpful suggestions. - Brettz9 06:53 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)
See this post and immediate followups for the current discussion. --Brion

Should I leave a disambiguation link on list of astronomical topics? Cassini is linked, but it is in reference to the Cassini probe; should I change the link and leave the disambiguation link or just change the link? Thanks. - Notheruser 19:45 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

Since that link is immediately followed by links to the people of the same name, it doesn't make a lot of sense to link the disambiguation page which provides those same links. Link the probe directly. --Brion 21:53 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)
That's what I was leaning towards...thanks for the clarification. -- Notheruser 22:06 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

If I check what links here on my user page, I discover that Talk:Richard Wagner archive apparently links to my user page. Which is fine, except it doesn't... Martin

Sure it does:
[1] [2] Not that I believe either source: sounds like standard journalistic hyperbole to me. -Martin
About 3/4 of the way down the page. HTH, Merphant

Let me clarify this: Talk:Richard Wagner archive redirects to Talk:Richard Wagner/Archive 1. Now, Talk:Richard Wagner/Archive 1 links to Martin, so therefore Talk:Richard Wagner/Archive 1 should show up on my "what links here" page (and, AFAIK, it does). However, Talk:Richard Wagner archive is showing up on my "what links here" page, and it definately should not. Is that clearer?

Aha, yes, that's clearer; I didn't notice it was a redirect. Interestingly, Talk:Richard Wagner/Archive 1 does not show up on 'what links here' from your user page, but Talk:Richard Wagner archive does, and is correctly labelled as a redirect page. I don't know why, sorry. -- Merphant 23:41 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

On the Eurovision Song Contest page, one entry shows up as text rather than a wikipedia link. In the table (1978), Izhar Cohen has two brackets around it, but fails to render as a link. I tried looking for a cause, but I couldn't find one. Is this a bug with links and tables (or have I overlooked something obvious)?? -- Notheruser 23:10 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

I think it was because there was a line break in the middle of the link. I've fixed it. -- Merphant 23:41 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)
Well, I guess it was something obvious :). -- Notheruser 00:03 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

Something that's confusing me -- on the Battle of Coronel article I have a link to HMS Canopus which works fine; however, on the Battle of the Falkland Islands article I have another link to HMS Canopus (since she survived the first one!) but it only appears as a red "edit" link. Anybody got any ideas why? Arwel 02:27 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

Both are blue when I go to look at them. If HMS Canopus was only created recently, you may have been getting a cached page or somesuch from a time before the HMS Canopus article existed. Happens to me all the time.
--Paul A 03:04 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)
No, the Canopus article is several days old now, and I'm still getting the "edit" link from the Falkland Islands battle! Weird... Arwel 13:41 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

I'm using Mozilla 1.3b on Mac OS 10.2 with advanced recent changes on. Sometimes when I click on the arrow to make multiple edits list separately, the arrow disappears and a small space is inserted, but the edits are not listed. I have to click reload and click the arrow again. Is it my browser? Tuf-Kat

I'm using Mozilla 1.3b on Windows 2000; I see the same thing if I click the arrow before the page has completely finished loading, but haven't noticed any problems when clicking after it's done. --Brion
Aah... I'm just impatient I guess. Tuf-Kat

Why are certain people (JtDirl-Zoe) insisting that it is proper to list names alphabetically by first name. How is this acceptable? Why should I look for Hitler after Adolf? Why should I look for Chamberlain after Neville? Why should I look for Bogart after Humphery? Hmmm, let me now look for Rommel after Erwin. After that I shall look for Clinton after Bill. Perhaps later I shall look for Eisenhower after Dwight. After tea I plan to look for Gary Gygax after Gary. Around dinnertime Ill be looking for Dickens after Charles. Before bed Ill hunt up Copperfield after David. Overnight Ill have my computer try and find Gates after Bill. When I wake up maybe it will have found Truman after Harry. For breakfast Ill look up Peet after Bill. For brunch Ill be examing a list in search of Wayne after John. I think by lunch I will have found Ford after Harrsion (and Henry!). Susan Mason


I agree this is a bad idea, and goes against all conventions. Apart from anything else, almost anyone looking up "Newton" would look under N, not I for Isaac. I don't even know the first names of Aristotle, Voltaire or Goethe! -- Chris Q 07:31 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

There is one convention it doesnt go against, thats the "wikiway" where if I suggest it, its wrong. Did you know that Im just like DW, Lir, ,172, Vera, 142, and basically all the other bad users because all I do is harass poor innocent users and try to vandalize and subterfuge their articles by changing them without getting permission from the high cabal. Last week I was crusading for my NPOV POV, now Im crusading for my own bias towards last-name alphabetization, where will it end? If RK is right, by next week Ill probably be insisting that it's ok for Chinese people to use their Chinese names on the ENGLISH wikipedia. I'd like to complain more but hold on cuz Im trying to find Vonnegut, I think its listed after Kurt somewhere... Susan Mason

Susan, I agree this this first names nusiness is unconventional, but it seems too firmly entrenched to try to change now. One advantage that it does have is that it makes links easier to set up.
For instance, in a sentence like "Charles Babbage, Clark Gable and Winston Churchill were seen at the Exchange Hotel in Kalgoorlie together last night", it's easier to create links by placing ]] and [['s around the names of Charles Babbage, Clark Gable and Winston Churchill. Under the surname first system, you'll need to add a |Babbage, Charles, |Gable, Clark and |Churchill, Winston as well for the links to work. Arno
Arno, I don't think Susan Mason's talking about article titles. I think she's saying that in, for instance, List of English people, the people should be listed in alphabetical order by surname, not by first name. I agree with this wholeheartedly, but with a certain amount of puzzlement: I know of no list in the Wikipedia that is listed by first name. Perhaps Susan Mason could supply some examples? --Paul A
Well, perhaps those particular pages could be redone. Just add |'s at the end of the links concerned - eg a link that reads Gomez Addams becomes Gomez Addams|Addams, Gomez. Arno 08:21 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)
Right thats the unacceptable course of action upon which I embarked. Susan Mason
When somebody is scanning down a list looking for names, their eye needs to focus on a vertical column. That vertical column needs to be alphabetized which is why the last name has to be listed first. Look at a phone book, there is a reason they did it that way. Susan Mason

Couple points here:

  1. 1:We dont need to change article titles to be last name first, we are not a paper encyclopedia.
  2. 2:We dont need to change all lists all at once. The way Ive been changing them is that everytime I add a name to a list, I change the 5 times on either side. Overtime they will all be changed.
  3. 3:We don't need to use last name first when writing text within the article itself.

Also:

or

or


Susan Mason


Lists should be in second-name order but titles should not. If this means having complex links in lists then I think that is the best option. An alternative would be to (slowly) add redirects for all names, making both titles accessible.

Susan, could you direct me to the discussion you have been having on this? Thanks.
I understood that the arrangement on, for example, List of Swiss people is the usual. Names are listed as "first name, second name" but in alphabetical order of last name. This doesn't lead to a problem in finding a name (search alphabetically by last name) but makes the list easier to read and easier to link. -- sannse 08:10 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

The list is harder to read if you are actually trying to find a specific name, because u don't have a nice neat vertical column of alphabetized letters which u can scan. If you go that list and search for Keller, chances are you are scanning the last names; which is why the last name should be listed first. Susan Mason

OK, I can see your point on that. With "first name, last name" it's easier to read the individual names but less easy to read the list as a whole. I think you missed my first question, could you give me a link to wherever you have been discussing this? -- sannse 08:27 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump

Perhaps I can clarify my question. Your first comment on this subject on this page was "Why are certain people (JtDirl-Zoe) insisting that it is proper to list names alphabetically by first name." I would be grateful for a link to the page where JtDirl-Zoe and you had the conversation that led to you posting this comment on this page. Thanks -- sannse 08:35 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for the links Susan. I think you may have misunderstood Zoe and JtdIrL's position. I think it is clear that all agree names should be listed in alphabetical order of last name. The only question is whether, within that arrangement, they should be written as (last-name, first-name) or (first-name last-name). I can see benefits to both arrangements. -- sannse 15:19 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_archive_2004-09-26&oldid=728781"