On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilhelm@nixeagle.org wrote:
The problem is picking the correct one involves lots of drama and arbcom cases. Drama that we did not have before the unlinking of dates. (This I a direct consequence of date unlinking)
Picking the correct format for a nation or culture merely involves checking format preferences in your computer. I doubt that there's much variation in the data used by Apple, Microsoft, Linux etc. They are all going to come up with International format for Brazil.
Where there's doubt, either discuss it on the article talk page or stick with the existing format. You know, like we do for ENGVAR for spelling.
As to Arbcom cases over date formats, could you point me to a recent case, please?
Peter
On 1/19/09, Skyring skyring@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Wily D wilydoppelganger@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Skyring skyring@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
Delirium wrote:
... strongly discourage edits that change one to
another, unless the article's strongly associated with a specific English-speaking country where one dialect predominates.
I'm puzzled here. Why is it only English-speaking nations that use dates?
-- Peter in Canberra
Because it's English Wikipedia. It's harder to claim there's a preferred dialect of English to use for the article on French Guiana.
What on earth does the variant of English used in a nation have to do with the date format used? Date format is an independent variable, like the colours of the national flag or the units of measurement.
In written English we commonly use two date formats, known as American (mdy) and International (dmy). All we have to do is pick the appropriate format for the subject, and we have reliable, easily accessed sources for nations and cultures to prevent arguments.
Where there is no clear format, such as for an article on swans or the International dateline, then fall back on the rules as per WP:ENGVAR - stay with the established format unless there is a good reason for change. That's the thinking behind the Arbcom ruling on jguk - the actual variety of English used is immaterial.