Template talk:Metricate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

SI to replace non-SI[edit]

This is misleading, and implies that SI units should replace non-SI units, which is not in conformance with the Manual of Style or with Reliable sources. SI units should be added parenthetically, not replace. —Centrxtalk • 14:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand this whole deal about having to use SI units on the wiki, anyway. This is the English Wikipedia, not the French Wikipedia :-/ - (), 07:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
SI is now commonly used in England and other English-speaking countries. Also, the English-language Wikipedia, the most comprehensive Wikipedia, is used by people who speak English in whatever countries, for whom it would at least be helpful to have metric units. —Centrxtalk • 04:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Would rephrasing it as: "This article or section does not contain SI equivalents to the units of measure used." work better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDrew (talkcontribs) 21:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

No SI units[edit]

"This article or section contains no SI units of measurement." is further misleading implying the each article should have at least one SI unit but that one would suffice. Many articles don't even need units at all. Those which do have them, though, tend to have many, most of which should be converted. Furthermore it emphasises SI but often a non-SI metric unit (the litre for example) will suffice or even be preferable. JЇѦρ 03:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Reasonably, the template can be applied only to articles with units of measure. The template could be changed to read "This article or section contains units of measurement but no SI units of measurement.", but I think it is clear the way it is now. —Centrxtalk • 21:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Clear, yes, but clearly wrong. The article or section might provide some conversions but might be missing others. I've just tagged Warren County, Indiana (yesterday's FA) with the template (I'd've done the conversion myself but it's ambiguous). The section in question converted acres (to hectares, which are fine but not SI, but that's another issue) but not bushels per acre. The tag is lying when used for articles which have some conversions but lack others (of course, this time it's true, hectares are not SI but that's not why I tagged the article). In short the tag says there are no conversions when it should say conversions are lacking. JIMp talk·cont 01:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Anti-American[edit]

This template is anti-American IMO. Despite the fact that Americans make up the majority of users on English WP, this template implies that its WP policy to use non-American measuring systems. Why can't we use both instead of trying denigrate the other? --Tocino 05:38, 15, October 2008 (UTC)

SI Units are used in the large majority of countries and all scientific fields. For geography I see reason to leave both, but especially in scientific fields why shouldn't the better system be used? How is it a direct attack against America to say metric is better than imperial... because it is. 211.30.161.54 (talk) 04:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
It's not anti-American. We can, often should and usually do have both. If you want a "provide US customary conversions" tag, make one. JIMp talk·cont 23:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
95% of the world (by population) uses SI units as their primary or sole units of measure. Wake up and smell the metric. :-) -TheDrew (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)