Talk:Bitis parviocula: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Jaap Winius |
imported>Jaap Winius |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
#Why have something in "see also" which is already in the article? --[[User:Peter J. King|Peter J. King]] 09:50, 13 February 2007 (CST) | #Why have something in "see also" which is already in the article? --[[User:Peter J. King|Peter J. King]] 09:50, 13 February 2007 (CST) | ||
See my answer on your talk page. --[[User:Jaap Winius|Jaap Winius]] 12:21, 13 February 2007 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 12:22, 13 February 2007
My formatting (now all reverted)
My problems were:
- To place a "common names" line before the article rather than in the article looks very odd.
- To use abbreviations rather than full names of unites is less clear for potential users (as is omitting a link to the relevant article).
- To leave in Wikipedia templates that simply show up as red "template" signs is surely undesirable.
- Why have something in "see also" which is already in the article? --Peter J. King 09:50, 13 February 2007 (CST)
See my answer on your talk page. --Jaap Winius 12:21, 13 February 2007 (CST)