Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/RD header
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the talk page for the RD index page i.e. the one with all the nice icons in a big table, when you enter the Reference Desk.
Contents |
[edit] Page Movement
This used to be the header used on the single-paged reference desk before it was forked. All relevant discussion to it as a single-paged reference desk header has been moved to Archive. --frothT C 06:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Note: The RD header was moved from Template:RD header. This talk page was copied here but I forgot that archive subpage so it has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/RD header/Archive. --frothT C 06:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Capitalization and ampersands in desk descriptors
Current version (without commas before "&")
| Wikipedia Reference Desk | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proposed version:
| Wikipedia Reference Desk | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] Discussion
I recently edited the header to remove first-letter capitalization from all save the first word in each desk descriptor and to replace the Serial commas, principally because I thought the repeated capitalization and use of ampersands to be aesthetically displeasing; and User:Jones2, consistent with my edit summary that anyone should feel free to rv, reverted. I wonder, then, whether anyone else might have any thoughts on the issue. For my part, whilst I recognize that our front matter here need not to comport with the MoS, and whilst I suppose the use of lower case for certain descriptors might suggest the insignifance of the categories described, I find the instant version to be, well, ugly. It has been around for some time, though, and so if no one has a particular problem with it, I'll have none either. Joe 21:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've moved you out of the box by adding |} to the end. Canderson7 (talk) 00:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thank you, thank you Canderson7 and thanks again. I just couldn't find it. --hydnjo talk 00:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Hmm...lots of stuff changed while I was on holidays. :-) Actually, the concern I have at the moment is whether someone who is visually impaired is able to navigate through the template. --HappyCamper 00:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- And a very important concern indeed, it does make some important and distinguishing difference if each subject is capitalized (to a visually impaired person) and so we are in favor of the current format. I'm posting the "caps" vs "no-caps", "&" vs "and" in response to a request at RD/talk. I prefer the way it is now shown (as stated above) but in an abundance of fairness, I've shown the proposed alternative (which I do not favor). Oh, (and in an abundance of happiness) welcome back HC. :-))) --hydnjo talk 00:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
Comments about the proposal to delete subsequent caps and to replace "&" with "and"
- Oppose. The current format is more easily read by folks with visual impairment and I've seen no strong argument for change at this time. --hydnjo talk 02:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. If keeping ampersands, I don't think there should be a comma before them. ("Foo, Bar & Biff" not "Foo, Bar, & Biff"). We're using this as a title, not shorthand for the actual word "and". DMacks 03:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- How about this (upper version, without commas) then? --hydnjo talk 03:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sehr gut. --HappyCamper 01:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- How about this (upper version, without commas) then? --hydnjo talk 03:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- I just want to state that when I took Technical Communications in College, the teacher told me its better to keep a comma before &, because take an example: I like my chip cream and cheese and ketchup. I think something like this was the example so she said its always better to keep commas before & regardless. Anyways I don't suppose I can vote here because I was the one to make the changes, so it would be conflict of interest. --Jones2 03:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- Just do it it's a minor edit, just hope the guy doesn't notice :) --frothT C 08:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I read that. lol. --Jones2 23:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmm seems to have worked! ;) --frothT C 05:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Imagemap
I changed the Click image links to Imagemap ones, as has been done on the main page. In doing so I noticed that we don't have nice full-sized svg icons for Literature or Music (Mona Lisa and Musical note icons), only the much smaller png icons. If anyone knows where to find the large icons, that'd be great. Rawling4851 18:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ooh nice I had no idea that mediawiki supports that now. Much more browser-compatible, good job --frothT 06:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reorder table to the seven refdesks
I'd like to reorder the links here. I've added my proposal to Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. – b_jonas 12:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
