This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
The subject's article and other works all use "No." rather than "number" so it makes sense to continue as per MOS:NUMERO. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:28, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such "collective rule" about all an artist's articles needing to either use "number" and "No." This is the flimsiest of excuses and MOS:NUMERO quite clearly says nothing about this. Most artist's articles have variations because different editors wrote them. You came here to discuss when you know you changed it first and you disregarded BRD then tried to lie in one of your summaries and say I introduced a change. No, Walter, you did here, and you know you did. Ss112 22:48, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
True. There is no collective rule about an artist's articles needing to use a consistent format. It's not a flimsy argument, it's called consistency, and that's what good works are built on. I'm sorry if you felt lied. I felt I maintained consistency. It should stay in that format so readers don't think we're amateurs. They read one article that has "No." and then this one has "number". Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And further, there's no extension like WP:DATERET for MOS:NUMERO, only that it's consistent in the article, so why not keep it consistent across the subject's articles? Consistency is all over Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the MOS mostly talks about consistency within an article and not a set of articles relating to a topic. Ss112 23:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
True, but style guides for major publications expect consistency across the work. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that there is no movement. Shall we open the discussion to a wider community? Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:44, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
