User talk:142.160.89.97/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions&#32;so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply  [ create a named account] . It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:
 * Create new pages and rename pages
 * Edit semi-protected pages
 * Upload images
 * Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

Note that in order for the first three features to be available, you must have had an account for a certain number of days and made a certain number of edits.

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (142.160.89.97) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Questions, or you can  to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;).

Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @  00:06, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Post-noms
Hello again! Just a reminder that having post-noms at 100% is not "non-standard post-nominal formatting" as you've said at Sybil Thorndike. There are two valid options for formatting post-noms as set out at MOS:POSTNOM. There wasn't a need to revert User:Necrothesp's edit. Personally, I use 100% and commas when there are 3 post-noms (sometimes 4) or less: making them small is about space saving and so that readers can skip the list of letters easier. Thanks, Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 21:23, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If that were the consensus, why would that not be the default setting of post-nominals? I imagine there's a reason why the discussion at Template talk:Post-nominals was against it. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 21:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Basically, its 85% because when the template was originally created years ago it was done so specifically for the use in incidences when an individual had loads of post-noms (firstly to shrink the space the post-noms took up in the introduction, and secondly to limit the space taken up on the editing screen) and not for every instance. The template is now being used for the latter without the correction of making them 100%. When commas are used it should always be 100% anyway. Is the discussion you are referring to the one that took place in 2014? Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 22:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your revision on Matt Casamassina
Hi. Regarding on Matt Casamassina, MOS:TIES and MOS:DATETIES concern topics that have strong ties to certain nations—such as the American Civil War article—and not people who are from a particular country.

I do appreciate that you helped improve the article! It was previously redirected to another article without consensus, which is why I revived it, but it should definitely be expanded, if possible (or redirected again if need be). Inter qwark talk  contribs 03:11, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * An individual is the topic in this case. MOS:TIES even uses multiple biographies as examples, such as Muhammad Ali Jinnah and J. R. R. Tolkien. Why would MOS:TIES not apply? (And even if it didn't, MOS:DATERET would apply to your change to the date format.) 142.160.89.97 (talk) 03:23, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, I suppose you’re right. Sorry about that. . Thanks for helping with the article! Inter qwark talk  contribs 03:32, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Warning
Please do not edit other editors Talk page comments as you did here In ictu oculi (talk) 06:52, 27 June 2018 (UTC)