Talk:British Pregnancy Advisory Service
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. |
| Start | This page has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance assessment scale |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, which collaborates on articles related to abortion, abortion law, the abortion debate, and the history of abortion. For more information, visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
[edit] Merge tag
The Ann Furedi article is thin and has been in a repeated deletion discussion (controversy?). Perhaps it should be merged with this article?--Anchoress 04:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
- Strongly agree. Not sure the Furedi article is controversial, just wafer-thin and not well written. It's also questionable that the woman is worthy of a separate WP article. Deep 13 07:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I don't understand
Why should the categories be formatted like [[Category:Foo|*]] instead of [[Category:Foo]]? It causes this article not to alphabetize in it's categories; what's gained by that? -GTBacchus(talk) 07:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- There's no reason why it should be done like that; I'm not experienced creating articles, I just did it the way I've seen it done in other articles. Sorry it wasn't the way you wanted. I didn't revert cuz I don't agree with you, I reverted because you messed up the formatting, it delisted one of the categories and put the category text up with the body text. I didn't know what you were trying to do (maybe partly because of your completely non-descriptive edit summary), so I just reverted. Please don't assume that a) everyone knows as much as you, and b) we haven't done what you think we should do for some diabolical reason.--Anchoress 07:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that was my carelessness, messing up the formatting. I really didn't think you were up to anything diabolical, I just think the phrase "what have you got against the alphabet?" is funny to use in an edit summary. Sorry if I gave the wrong idea; I could have been clearer. -GTBacchus(talk) 07:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't funny at all. But apology accepted, and thanks for clarifying. Actually IIRC I went to another abortion-related article and just copied the categories, deleting the couple that didn't apply.--Anchoress 07:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sometimes, that * is useful, like if you're putting the article Abortion into Category:Abortion, it's good to use the star so it floats to the top of the list. When entering people in categories, the best way to do it is like: [[Category:Pro-choice activists|Furedi, Ann]] - then she alphabetizes under F. Sorry if I'm boring you, but once you know... you know. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK, that's cool. I like learning new stuff. Can't promise to remember (I hardly ever create articles), but I *will* remember where the instructions are, so I'll come back here and remind myself.--Anchoress 08:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sometimes, that * is useful, like if you're putting the article Abortion into Category:Abortion, it's good to use the star so it floats to the top of the list. When entering people in categories, the best way to do it is like: [[Category:Pro-choice activists|Furedi, Ann]] - then she alphabetizes under F. Sorry if I'm boring you, but once you know... you know. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't funny at all. But apology accepted, and thanks for clarifying. Actually IIRC I went to another abortion-related article and just copied the categories, deleting the couple that didn't apply.--Anchoress 07:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that was my carelessness, messing up the formatting. I really didn't think you were up to anything diabolical, I just think the phrase "what have you got against the alphabet?" is funny to use in an edit summary. Sorry if I gave the wrong idea; I could have been clearer. -GTBacchus(talk) 07:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
