Revision as of 00:20, 28 April 2009 edit Shoemaker's Holiday (talk \| contribs) Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 20,613 edits →What does this solve? ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:05, 25 May 2009 edit undo Tcncv (talk \| contribs) Edit filter managers, Administrators 18,017 edits →Cleanup of poorly formed dates: new section Next edit →
Line 294: Does this result actually solve anything or make edit warring any less likely? surely we will now get into arguments over what 'germane to the subject' actually means in practice. It could be argued that year links are in some cases by definition germane to the subject if they add historical context to a subject of international politics say. [[User:G-Man\|<font color="blue">G-Man</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:G-Man\|<font color="#00BFFF">?</font>]]</sup> 23:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC) :Well, it sorted out the autoformatting issue. The rest can percolate through at whatever speed. [[User:Shoemaker's Holiday\|Shoemaker's Holiday]] ([[User talk:Shoemaker's Holiday\|talk]]) 00:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC) == Cleanup of poorly formed dates == Please see a discussion at [[WT:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Cleanup up poorly formed dates]]. -- [[User:Tcncv\|Tcncv]] ([[User talk:Tcncv\|talk]]) 06:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Date formatting and linking poll: Difference between revisions