Content deleted Content added
→abbr=on violates MOS: Responded to edit request |
→abbr=on violates MOS: fix indent |
||
Line 463:
: Johnuniq, there's noting personal{{snd}} I'm addressing ''you'' about the current situation only because you are the one who introduced <code>abbr_on</code> but in that edit's summary did not explain why, neither can I find anything reasonable on this discussion page, nor the pages of the templates this option was supposed to reproduce. So you definitely know about the situation and its history much more that I do, thus I'm asking you why this has happened without any regard for WP:MOS. Since you're also much more familiar with the tools, it would help if you can find how much and where {{tlx|time interval}} with {{para|abbr|on}} is used to assess how it will be affected by my proposed correction. (Regarding abbreviations in {{tlx|age for infant}}, it looks like an example of somebody's made-up nonsense: no explanations why standard notation can't be used for standard units, plus searching Google for {{google|infant age "dys"}} suggests that it's not even some established jargon in any field.) And yes, if Huntster and JFG can help, it would be appreciated, because I also didn't find any justification for the current behavior of "abbr" in their comments at [[Template talk:Time interval]]. — [[User:Mikhail Ryazanov|Mikhail Ryazanov]] ([[User talk:Mikhail Ryazanov|talk]]) 04:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] for this alteration '''[[Wikipedia:Edit requests|before]]''' using the {{Tlx|Edit template-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ETp --> Okay, two things here. First, Mikhail, Johnuniq has indicated that they were not the one that decided what the module outputs, and I believe them. Their statement says that they simply took the existing templates and converted them to a module; if a template used "improper" abbreviations before the shift, they were ported into the module. Please don't put words into their mouths when they have sufficiently explained their role in the creation of this module.
:Second, I am going to close this request until consensus can be determined. Let's not worry about ''why'' the module is the way it is, but whether it should be changed. For example, does it make sense to have different abbrevs for "infant" and "non-infant" statuses? Should this module be updated to better conform to the MOS? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)▼
▲Second, I am going to close this request until consensus can be determined. Let's not worry about ''why'' the module is the way it is, but whether it should be changed. For example, does it make sense to have different abbrevs for "infant" and "non-infant" statuses? Should this module be updated to better conform to the MOS? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
| |||