User talk:78.146.132.102

Hi there. Your edit at Cicero was just fine; if you come across further inconsistencies of this kind in Wikipedia articles, do please just go ahead and make the necessary changes for the sake of WP:ERA consistency. Many articles - this one included - carry a hidden note informing editors of the era system used in the article. Anyway, I'm probably speaking to someone who has edited here many times before but a welcome message can do no harm.

Welcome!

Hi 78.146.132.102! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Haploidavey (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, 2 of my friends and I are classicists in training and have been going through all the articles on Wikipedia relating to our degree. BC/AD and BCE/CE seems to be the major conflict for the classics articles, but we're aiming to have uniformity in articles and remove any errors that we find. Hope to hear more feedback on the work. 78.146.132.102 (talk) 14:34, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How pleasant to see such even-handedness. One further friendly word of advice; please do make sure you read and digest WP:ERA; if in doubt, the first instance of a particular era system tends to set precedence. As far as I can tell from a glance at its history, Apollo used BC/AD, way back in 2006. Not a biggie, as far as I'm concerned, and not an invariable rule but still a legitimate basis for challenge, and worth keeping in mind during your laudable efforts to establish consistency. Regards to all. Haploidavey (talk) 15:24, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So should I change the BCE/CE in Apollo to BC/AD based on the article's history? 78.146.132.102 (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Note the last statement at WP:ERA: "Do not change from one style to another unless there is substantial reason for the change, and consensus for the change with other editors." If the first use in the article's history is BC, and if a different era system was introduced without discussion and consensus, then yes, I'd play safe and change it. But you need to check; don't just take my word for it. Once you've checked, you can add a hidden note (see Cicero's article, for example) to help dissuade passing era-warriors (they are legion), and provide a reference point for speedy reversions of persistent era-kamikases. Such times we live in. Haploidavey (talk) 15:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked the discussion page for Apollo and there is no mention of changing the era system from BC/AD to BCE/CE. Reckon that means that the BCE/CE army did it without a discussion first being done. The other dates in discussion page are all BC/ADs. 78.146.132.102 (talk) 15:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then be bold! Haploidavey (talk) 16:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=) 78.146.132.102 (talk) 16:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found a problem, a now defunct user put BCE in early versions of mythology articles so this could mean that any reverts to BC/AD could be challenged because of this user.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.