User talk:Marchjuly

Josef Josten

Dear MarchJuly and Hammersoft,

Once again, thank you for your advice on 11th Sept. re the article [1].

I agree that I have an interest in the subject of the article. I made a declaration of interest when I submitted it: I'm not sure if this is still visible.

I accept Hammersoft's comment about the citation: I have now removed it and "toned down" the highlighted text. I am looking for a more appropriate (independent) citation - preferably one that is accessible on the internet.

I shall also look into the possibility of a "non-free" image to upload. I appreciate your patience - this is still work in progress!

Best regards, Honza Giles (talk) 08:18, 4 October 2021 (UTC)Honza Giles

"250 thousand"

You referred me to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Show me where this odd combination of numbers and "thousand" is stated to be preferable to either all numbers of all words in that article, because I did a search throughout the article for "thousand" and found no such advice. And when I said I've never seen this odd combination, I mean anywhere. I didn't do a search through Wikipedia; I simply have never seen this with thousands, as opposed to millions and higher numbers. Maybe it's standard somewhere outside the U.S., but I also spent two years in school in Malaysia and don't remember seeing this combination there, either. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, your edit summary seemed to be arguing for the edit I made! "Probably best to follow the guidance in MOS:NUMNOTES here and either keep them all as words or change them all to numerals." What did I do, and what did you do? Looks like you should follow your own advice and revert your edit. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Your edit changed content the from "a total population estimated to be between 250 thousand and 2.5 million" to "a total population estimated to be between 250,000 and 2.5 million". You changed thousand to ",000", but left "million" spelled out. That seemed odd to me and what is I was trying point out. I probably could've made that more clear in my edit summary instead of trying to use a short-cut link; so, my apologies for that. The first time such content was added to the article seems to have been here in 2014 as "250,000 to 2,500,000 individuals", but it's first appearance in the lead seems to have been made a few hours later by the same editor here as "250 thousand and 2.5 million individuals".

Anyway, my comment about searching Wikipedia was simply to add "250 thousand" to the "Search Wikipedia" box at the top of the page to see that "250 thousand" is used in quite a number of articles. I've got no idea as to what standard is followed in Malaysia or anywhere else outside the US states, but I don't necessarily agree with your assessment that it's uncommon, at least not in the US. I may be wrong, however, and will ask for clarification at WT:DATE. I will self-revert back to your version while things are being sorted. The current Eurasian eagle-owl#Status reads as "250,000 to 2,500,000 individual birds" and maybe that's how the lead should read as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:57, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

I have no problem with using the number 2,500,000 if that's what people want to do, but I would strongly assert that the weird "consistency" of "250 thousand and 2.5 million" is the worst possible solution and that there's nothing at all weird about "between 250,000 and 2.5 million". You see that kind of phrase all the time in publications like the New York Times. Their Manual of Style is not easily available for free online, but this is from AP's Style Guide. Find an example of "[digit] thousand" in it. Abbreviating the number "250K" is another matter but not for encyclopedia articles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

• There's complete agreement at WT:MOS that forms such as 250 thousand have no place, even when juxtaposed to 2.5 million. It's not worth adding something to MOS because it's an odd issue, but experienced editors are clear on the point. EEng 17:22, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

thank you for your advice

I will adhere to all of your feedback moving forward. I am new to this so this help is really appreciated. Apologies and thanks again. --MariaPass (talk) 00:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)MariaPass

Hi MariaPass. No need to apologize. Just try and follow the guidance given in WP:PSCOI from here on. If you have any specific questions about what types of edits it's OK for you to make, you can always find someone at WP:TEAHOUSE or WP:HELPDESK who might be able to help you out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:27, 27 October 2021 (UTC)