Regarding the presentation of four-digit numbers, I doubt we have a policy for it. Some official style guides will insert a comma (e.g., 1,764), others say not to bother (e.g., 1764). Both are generally common and acceptable. I prefer the latter for habit and personal taste, but it's no biggie. Five-digit numbers and higher generally have commas included.

If in doubt, we could follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Which says both styles are fine for four-digit numbers, unless they're years in which case they don't get commas, and commas are included in all larger numbers. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:14, June 8, 2013 (UTC)

There are so many dates and population statistics in close proximity in this article that I think the comma eliminates any confusion between them. But I made it a separate edit so you could easily undo it if you feel strongly about it.—Moviesign (talk) 03:26, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
No, it's fine, and that's a good reason. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:56, June 8, 2013 (UTC)


Regarding the placement of the History section, for my cities pages I followed the format usually used by Wikipedia, which is to place the history section first or near the beginning, followed by sections on demographics, government, economics, and cultural stuff. I don't know if there's a specific reason for that. — BadCatMan (talk) 08:36, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

BadCat, I am just following the format High admin FW stated in Forum:Standardizing article sections, but I could move all the History sections in my list... and since you and Hash are the only High admins, I will take your idea. So where you would like the History section to go :) - Darkwynters (talk) 22:24, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
The standardised sections were only created as guidelines, not as a hard-and-fast rule, IIRC. I think we left it open for alternative section titles and varying orders of sections. I think, for some articles, having the history first gives useful context to the rest of the article. In Wheloon, the post-Spellplague history says how Wheloon became a prison city, and the later sections give detail to that. In Hlintar], the history explains why dwarves shun the place. In Ylraphon, the history explains how much of the city came to be ruins and swamp-ridden. With history placed last, a lot more context has to be given to references in other sections to say how such-and-such a situation came about, while this occurs naturally in a history section. (On the other hand, I placed history last for the Vast, as the rest of article was general in scope and didn't really depend on the history.) I design my articles with the overall structure and arrangement in mind. I think in the case of Wheloon, the previous history placement works best. — BadCatMan (talk) 00:26, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Notable locationsEdit

Just a quick question... comparing Wheloon's "dot" setup versus the "bullet" setup of the Marsember notable locations... which design do you like best? Personally, I am torn, but I do like BadCat's "dots" because it conserves space... thoughts? - Darkwynters (talk) 22:36, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

I like my way, obviously. :) The horizontal list reduces the length of the article, reduces white space, and presents more information to the eye without having to scan down. — BadCatMan (talk) 00:26, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
If there are only 2 up to 5 locations (subchoices, etc), Marsember's vertical "bullet" lineup isn't a problem. But it is for bigger numbers. So for 4 or more I would say BadCatMan's Wheloon horizontal lineup is far more suitable for the previously mentioned reasons.— Jandor (talk) 08:43, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
There is an exception though: If you check Marsember#Inhabitants, the vertical lineup seems better if there is a small note to be added next to the places/inhabitants/etc...— Jandor (talk) 10:48, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Man, I am torn on those comments next to the bullets... yes, they inform the reader, but sometimes they clog the page... especially when the reader can just click on the location... that horizontal orientation rocks... in defense, many editors are now using location categories, so the line even says "taverns"... Personally, I am going to implement your setup, BadCat (oh wait I have been using you setup)... no wait, I want to see how BadCat responds to your comment, Jandor... okay, DW, waits on an answer :) - Darkwynters (talk) 22:59, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.