Jump to content

User talk:Britishfinance: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SineBot (talk | contribs)
Bots
2,547,576 edits
m Signing comment by 109.255.33.206 - "fyi"
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:
|archive = User talk:Britishfinance/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = User talk:Britishfinance/Archive %(counter)d
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|minthreadsleft = 1
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 2
|minthreadstoarchive = 2
|counter = 1
|counter = 1

Revision as of 17:54, 1 April 2019


The Richest Man in Babylon

WP:NONFICTION says that "an exhaustive list of contents, without any editorial commentary or significance, should not be included. Unless the list has encyclopedic value it is better to convey this in the synopsis". My edit summary removing the table of contents says that "a book's table of contents should never be included in a Wikipedia article about the book", which is my own opinion but not contradictory to WP:NONFICTION in this particular situation. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:20, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Metropolitan90. Thanks for taking the time to come to my talk page to explain. I had included the contents list under the WP:NONFICTION criteria of: "Unless the list has encyclopedic value it is better to convey this in the synopsis". This Contents list dates from the first 1926 edition (which I dug up from archive.org), and also contains the original wording and format of the different groups of parables, which the book is famous for using (and are sometimes misquoted/misspelt in articles about the book). I noted that the Intelligent Investor (which is linked to on the article), also gives a full Contents listing, although it is the 2003 edition (different from Graham's original edition). I thought a reader might find such Contents useful and interesting. thanks. Britishfinance (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Webtoon

Hi. Might you have some input to offer at Talk:Webtoon § Linkfarm? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 08:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Csilla Molnár and inter-language links

Why did you decide to remove my uses of the {{interlanguage link}} template, which provides a link to the other Wikipedia while still showing that we don't have an article in English wiki (and possibly nudging interested editors into creating it)? PamD 22:25, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: Isn't it more useful to give readers a blue-link to their Wikipedia Hungarian articles, which they can translate with one right-click? I think the red-link implies to most readers that such an article doesn't exist and therefore not to click on it? I didn't realise it myself despite the fact I had been editing the article (and contributing on it at AfD). Not sure therefore it is such a useful tool (by definition, hitting a blue-linked hu-WP article implies there is no en-WP article)? However, revert if you feel strongly about it. Britishfinance (talk) 22:32, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The small blue "hu" link goes to the Hungarian article, and disappears when the English article is created. With your method, we could still have a link to the Hungarian article after someone had created an English article, as they wouldn't know about your link. I can't immediately find a policy or guideline suggesting either your or my technique as preferred. PamD 23:02, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PamD: Pity the colour wasn't also blue (or at least not red). In fairness, your work on rescuing the article is what will (hopefully) keep it (and got me interested in also helping it at AfD); you also have a lot more experience than I. You decide for both of us. all the best. Britishfinance (talk) 23:24, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary, I hope?

I'm a big proponent of stepping away from the project when you need some time to focus on other things or cool off or just because, but it'd be great to see you back here when you are ready! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 09:14, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

+1 — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 16:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leprechaun economics

Paul Krugman just included a link to your Leprechaun economics article in one of his tweets on @paulkrugman [1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.33.206 (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Britishfinance&oldid=890494244"