User talk:Mamandel
From the LDC Language Resource Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(New page: For signing, would it be worth following the Wikipedia convention of signing after the comment as opposed to before ? - ~~~~) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
For signing, would it be worth following the Wikipedia convention of signing after the comment as opposed to before ? - [[User:Ftyers|Ftyers]] 15:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC) | For signing, would it be worth following the Wikipedia convention of signing after the comment as opposed to before ? - [[User:Ftyers|Ftyers]] 15:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | That works well for a short comment or a series of short comments, following the mail and email convention (sig at end). It would also work well for individual resources. But it could easily get confusing with longer or more complex content -- multiple paragraphs, bulleted lists (see, e.g., [[Tamil/Tamil#Topical_word_lists]]). That includes sections; even if a section initially has only one item in it, you don't want to have to try to remember to reformat the signing when you add more. -- [[User:Mamandel|Mamandel]] 15:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 15:42, 22 April 2010
For signing, would it be worth following the Wikipedia convention of signing after the comment as opposed to before ? - Ftyers 15:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
That works well for a short comment or a series of short comments, following the mail and email convention (sig at end). It would also work well for individual resources. But it could easily get confusing with longer or more complex content -- multiple paragraphs, bulleted lists (see, e.g., Tamil/Tamil#Topical_word_lists). That includes sections; even if a section initially has only one item in it, you don't want to have to try to remember to reformat the signing when you add more. -- Mamandel 15:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
