Wikipedia talk:Date formatting and linking poll/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Truth in advertising: The same old tired debate. |
→Truth in advertising: Moving into new section |
||
Line 334:
::could someone who favours this proposal explain the rationale for linking years in such cases, please and thank you - is it to visually highlight them, or ... ? [[User:Sssoul|Sssoul]] ([[User talk:Sssoul|talk]]) 07:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
==Year links==
I've moved this into a new section, since it has nothing to do with that theme. It is a re-start of an old debate, and one that might have avoided intemperate language. [[User:Tony1|<font color="darkgreen">'''Tony'''</font >]] [[User talk:Tony1|<font color="darkgreen">(talk)</font >]] 16:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
:::This part of the whole debate is just yet another occurrence of the ancient debate between [[meta:immediatism|immediatists]] and [[meta:eventualism|eventualists]]. The immediatists say "year pages aren't useful", the eventualists say "be patient. Look at [[1345]] as an example of what year pages will be like."
| |||