Content deleted Content added
→Post-noms: I think that it accidentally unindented |
|||
Line 450:
::: Hello, for what bit? [[User:Gaia Octavia Agrippa|Gaia Octavia Agrippa]] <sup>[[User talk:Gaia Octavia Agrippa|Talk]]</sup> 03:36, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
::::{{tq|Its not about first use of a template, its about the historical formatting on a particular article.}} [[Special:Contributions/142.160.89.97|142.160.89.97]] ([[User talk:142.160.89.97#top|talk]]) 03:38, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
{{
▲{{cquote|Where this manual provides options, '''consistency should be maintained within an article unless there is a good reason to do otherwise'''. The Arbitration Committee has ruled that editors should not change an article from one guideline-defined style to another without a substantial reason unrelated to mere choice of style, and that revert-warring over optional styles is unacceptable. If discussion cannot determine which style to use in an article, '''defer to the style used by the first major contributor'''.}}
::::: Which I think we should, and was probably discussed elsewhere but I don't keep notes, because post-nominal formatting is established in the MOS at [[WP:MOS]]. I hope that's the type of reference you were looking for, [[User:Gaia Octavia Agrippa|Gaia Octavia Agrippa]] <sup>[[User talk:Gaia Octavia Agrippa|Talk]]</sup> 03:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
::::::I'm not sure that I understand the applicability of [[MOS:NUM]], which applies to dates and numbers. [[Special:Contributions/142.160.89.97|142.160.89.97]] ([[User talk:142.160.89.97#top|talk]]) 03:50, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
| |||