Forums: Helping Hand > Manual of Style

Use the following template for a nicely presented post:

{{Forum post|Write your message here!|~~~~}}

I've noticed that some have been changing headings from title case to sentence case. Why are we making these edits? To the best of my knowledge, we have not agreed on a standard for this. Wikipedia uses sentence case, but there is no reason for us to do so. I think we should come to some sort of consensus on the matter before we start editing a whole bunch of entries.

I personally much prefer title case, since a heading is, after all, a title.

~ Lhynard (talk) 14:34, March 2, 2016 (UTC)

I kinda like title case, but I was going by BadCat's Manual of Style. By all means, open the floor for discussion if you feel strongly about it.
Moviesign (talk) 14:44, March 2, 2016 (UTC)

I LOVE that BatCat is working on a Manual of Style; I think we need one, and my desire for consistency and standards outweighs my desire for title case. I'm just arguing that when BatCat is ready, we should discuss what things we like and don't like the same way we deal with any other proposals, before we go making changes.
~ Lhynard (talk) 14:47, March 2, 2016 (UTC)

I've made a couple of changes to de-cap section headings, as per BadCat's Manual of Style. This was mostly for the purpose of clearing the page caches (in older versions of MediaWiki this was necessary, but apparently not any longer), and not because I felt editing the case down was hugely important. I was operating under the assumption that sentence case was established practice. For the record, I'm pretty sure the Wikipedia sentence case practice is based on an old version (or simplified reading) of the Chicago Manual of Style, and is mainly used for the sake of consistency. Personally, I favor sentence case in titles, as I feel it looks cleaner. However, what's most important here is settling on a standard so things can be kept nice and uniform. I'll abide by whatever you decide is better.
--Ir'revrykal (talk) 15:36, March 2, 2016 (UTC)

I know I've been using sentence-case headings. TBH, I prefer more capitals, but when I first started here, people changed my upper-cases to lower-cases, so I assumed it was already a standard and I've been using it ever since. Hence why I put it in the style guide. I imagine most standard styles came about the same way: more people used one way than another, others followed, someone assumed it was a standard and wrote down that it was.

I keep meaning to finish the style guide, but other things keep come up. Including being invited to write for a professional style guide, for which my FRW style guide turned out to be a good example of my work. :)

Actually, it would help if you all make suggestions, raise concerns, or flag issues with me now, rather than after the MoS is done. That way we can settle things prior to writing, I get more ideas on what to write about, and I get more of a push to finish it. :)

— BadCatMan (talk) 07:14, March 3, 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the way wikia links work, only the first letter can be either capital or lower case, the rest has to match case exactly, and thus we have a naming policy. I'm guessing this is why sentence case (capitalizing only the first letter and proper nouns) was also used in titles in the past. I vote for title case (capitalizing all but the articles and prepositions) to be used on all major section headings (the == and === level headings), and title and subtitles of infoboxes. That's the style I have been using, although my contributions occasionally, but not consistently, got edited back to sentence case.
Moviesign (talk) 12:58, March 3, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the naming policy for article titles is for clean linking purposes, but that limitation does not apply for headings.

It sounds like 3 of us like title case, and 1 of us likes sentence case. Also, I'll note that whoever originally made the suggested headings listed on the Template doc. pages used title case, so that was the "policy" that I "believed" when I first joined. I've been meaning to give more feedback on the MoS in progress, but I've been falling behind recently....

~ Lhynard (talk) 14:13, March 3, 2016 (UTC)

I have another question about the mechanics of style. Should I use HTML entities to write something like −20° F (−20° F) or should I put in the actual font characters, like so: −20° F. Two pages where you can see these in use are cold snap and aura of comfort. Using entities is arguably more portable, but once you input the characters from wherever you can find them (hopefully the "more" menu in the oasis skin or at the bottom of the edit window in monobook), you can cut and paste them where they need to go and editing becomes more WYSIWYG. Does anyone use the visual editor? How would you enter this quantity using the visual editor?

How do we want to handle special symbols like this, and do we care enough to run a bot over all the pages to convert from one style to the other?

Vaguely related links: Forum:Consensus on minus signs, Forgotten Realms Wiki:Minus signs

Moviesign (talk) 16:23, May 29, 2016 (UTC)

For a start, I agree with the old policy: using the hyphen as a minus sign is much easier for every user (who isn't me and doesn't have Windows Character Map open permanently). Advanced users and people like me who care about such things should prefer the true minus sign. It just looks nicer and more professional.

As to HTML entities vs special characters for us advanced users... I can see the benefits and flaws of both styles. The HTML entities (which I didn't know how to do until today) can be very obscure if you don't know what they are or represent, especially things like "amp" and "nbsp", but "minus" is fairly clear. But they're hard to input. Wikia won't even show them in MediaWiki:Edittools; they'll display on that link itself but not while editing, so there's a super-secret non-breaking space there you can't see but can input invisibly. So the HTML entities need to be typed out fresh each time.

Meanwhile, special characters can be clearer, ° vs "deg" for example, and are easier to input from a character map or edit tools. On the other hand, hyphen, en dash, em dash, and minus all look the same in the source editor.

I don't know. On a character by character basis, both styles have their pros and cons, but they're not even consistently the same pros and cons. Mostly, these are a thing for advanced editors who can do them, according to their skills. For me, with the source editor and character map, special characters are easier. So, I don't think it matters which we use. I can address both forms in the MoS, and let individuals choose which they prefer.

— BadCatMan (talk) 11:06, May 30, 2016 (UTC)

In titles of articles, I believe we have replaced all minuses and dashes with the hyphen, and all curly apostrophes with the straight one. Most of our pages with names that include û, é, and ô have redirects using u, e, and o, but we are not 100% on that. The less barriers we have for people finding info, the better. Inside articles, I'm all for making it look as professionally typeset as possible.

I'm the opposite when it comes to typing in non-keyboard characters. I don't like removing my fingers from the keyboard to touch the mouse or the trackpad on my laptop. I can type the HTML entities just as fast as typing a word with nary a blip in my concentration. We only use a handful of special characters, so once you learn a few they are quite handy, IMO.

Moviesign (talk) 13:34, May 30, 2016 (UTC)

I use the HTML entities and prefer them for the reasons Moviesign mentioned, but I don't think we need to have a policy for this one.
~ Lhynard (talk) 22:25, June 3, 2016 (UTC)

Late to the party on this one, but on the subject of title case versus sentence case: in general Wikipedia has been a leader in terms of community-driven, collaborate knowledge bases, and personally I believe we should differ from it only where there's a clear and agreed need.

The exception is where we have adopted an unwritten standard, the standard is not largely consequential, and it would be much harder to shift all existing articles to a new standard than simply officially adopt the existing one officially.

Given that title versus sentence is really a visual preference, Wikipedia already uses sentence case, and, largely, we are using sentence case already, I would discourage a change to title case.

That said, time is precious and the wiki is spotty in places and lacking in many others, so if it's a choice between someone spending a day adding and fixing contributions that readers will value, versus changing a bunch of capitalisation, I think the choice is clear!

Fw190a8 07:27, December 13, 2016 (UTC)

I really need to get back to the MoS. But yes, well said, Fw190a8. It's not something worth changing or enforcing, and using only one style consistently on a page is preferable. I figure in the MoS I'll discuss both styles and let the editor decide. Then we'll see which wins out.
— BadCatMan (talk) 12:52, December 13, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.