I have a question on the consensus for formatting within the Flossary pages.When I read a page with multiple "boldings" of that page's term (and/or every time a "linked" word is used, it is... well, linked), it can get a bit irritating. Does anyone else feel this way?I was thinking that perhaps we could just "bold" the first mention of a page's term within the "quick definition" and then the "expanded definition." After that, it could just be typed as a regular word, since it has already been boldy referenced once. Same with links to other terms within the definition. Link it once, then just type it in regular typeface. Sort of how it's done in the WSJ. Once they have bolded a company's name within an article, it is in regular typeface thereafter.I have changed this to my liking on a couple of pages, but then thought that it is such a major formatting "guideline" that it should be voted on by consensus.In the same vein, I think we should consider not capitalizing the term throughout the page. What say y'all? I'm thinking that if the term would not normally be capitalized within an unrelated article, it shouldn't be capitalized throughout our article. Agree? Disagree?And kindly note: For anyone who has done any or all of the above, my intention is not to pick on you or "red-line" your work. However, I do think it is a valid topic for discussion that we should consider as editors, for the betterment of the Flossary pages -- whichever way the consensus goes.Best regards,Kathie
Hi Kathie,I think the linked words are automatically created by the Wiki. MediaWiki (the software behind Flossary if I'm not mistaken) automatically creates links to words it recognizes as pages within the Wiki.I could be wrong, in which case, it certainly seems like reduced effort to only create a link for something once. Another possiblity is to have a section at the bottom of the pages for references and/or links where all links are listed.Foolishy,Paul
Hi Kathie and Paul,The software does not automatically create links for recognized words, we have to do that with the double hard brackets.The format I like and which we started with is bold the word or phrase the first time in the quick definition and then leave it as normal font every other time it's used. Wiki links don't have to be bold as they'll appear as a different color automatically.Cheers,Jim
consensus for formatting within the Flossary pages.Excellent discussion! Thanks for starting it Kathie. I agree with Jim. Bold the first instance of the page name in the article. This should be in the quick definition. After that, there's no need to bold it. Same deal with linking related terms. After the first instance of the term, don't worry about linking it a second time. This is what Fool.com does in article when we mention company names and tickers.I think we should consider not capitalizing the term throughout the page. Agree entirely. Capitalize as you would normally if you were writing an article or a board post.And kindly note: For anyone who has done any or all of the above, my intention is not to pick on you or "red-line" your workDon't worry about this disclaimer. It is very Foolish to start discussions such as these. I hope every editor feels empowered to question things, and I also hope no editor will take offense to a polite discussion or talking-point such as this one, even if that editor has been doing that exact thing.As long as the intent is to improve the resource we're building together, then no-one should take issue with suggestions or questions, even if it's a 180 from what they've been doing. Jeremy
As long as the intent is to improve the resource we're building together, then no-one should take issue with suggestions or questions, even if it's a 180 from what they've been doing.JeremyAgreed. However, we are human beings (well, most of us, anyway) -- and humans are subject to "stuff." Having been an editor, perhaps I am a tad sensitive as to how others perceive my "help." (Not that that has ever stopped me.) Just wanted to avert a mass lynching-party. :o)And we have new folks joining who may or may not be familiar with editing of their posts.So here is my take on it: As an editor of Flossary, I will edit my own and others' pages in the perception that my edits will make it more accurate/readable/objective/whatever/take-your-pick. I expect others to do the same with my posts and/or edits.If I change something, and another person changes it back to the original, I will likely email that person with my thoughts on why I think mine is the better version. If I convince you to my way of thinking, wonderful! If not, then...Off with their heads! (bwa-ha-ha-ha)Just so we're clear. I'm a really sweet and wonderful person. Really. Honest. Trust me on this.But the editor in me can be merciless, when in search of excellence. Best regards,Kathie
Ah whoops I'm one of the (if not the) likely offender(s) here. I'll go fix my incorrect usages that I can find that still remain. I must have missed these guidelines when I read the styleguide. Ah the problem of having 60 tabs open in Firefox at the same time.Sorry about that, I'll endeavor to better in the future.
I think if we want format standards, we should create a format guideline FAQ and have it placed in the Announcements column to the right and added to the Getting Started page.FuskieWho is now starting to second guess his own formatting choices...
I think if we want format standards, we should create a format guideline FAQ and have it placed in the Announcements column to the right and added to the Getting Started page.Here's where a goodly portion of the info can be found:http://wiki.fool.com/wiki/Help:Styleguidehttp://wiki.fool.com/wiki/Help:FormattingHad I remembered to go review those pages, I could have saved myself posting the question in the first place. (Although a little clarification never hurts, I suppose.)One of the things I am finding that is unfortunate as I age, is that without proper sleep, my mind just simply doesn't function as well as I wish it would. I "forget" stuff I already knew, or forget that I've forgotten that I knew it... do you see a pattern developing here?Also note: You can even edit the "Help" pages for all of us here on Flossary! When I first started, I didn't understand how to type the multiple quotation marks around words/phrases to get the desired effect (either formatting for italics or bold). So I went in and edited that section on the formatting page to clarify it for others who might not be up-to-speed on such things.The entire wiki, more or less, is subject to change, refinement, clarifying... in other words, we have the freedom to make it as fabulous as we possibly can. For both ourselves and ultimately, the general public.So, if you see a need that has not been addressed... consider addressing it! I tell you, the power engendered can make one positively giddy. (lol)Best regards,Kathie
I think if we want format standards, we should create a format guideline FAQ and have it placed in the Announcements column to the right and added to the Getting Started page.It's in the help section:http://wiki.fool.com/wiki/Category:Help_pagesSpecifically:http://wiki.fool.com/wiki/Help:StyleguideNote also that you can edit the help pages so feel free to put a link to the style guide on the getting started page - a great suggestion, by the way, as I started writing before I found the style guide.-Brian
Yeah, what Kathie said (funny how we even mentioned editing help pages). Apparently it took me at least 6 min to find the page and proof read my post as I'd swear Kathie's answer wasn't there when I started.-Brian
...as I'd swear Kathie's answer wasn't there when I started.No, it wasn't. At least, I suspect, not when you started writing your post. (It's amazing how time flies when you're constructing a post/reply.)I posted, and then saw yours, and thought..."Wow! We said the same thing!" Great minds with but one thought. (lol) That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. :o)Best regards,Kathie
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra