Talk:Hormozgan Province

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Iran (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Dates and numbers in this article[edit]

Wikipedia policy is quite clear on use of Eras in articles:

Both the BCE/CE era names and the BC/AD era names are acceptable, but be consistent within an article. Normally you should use plain numbers for years in the Common Era, but when events span the start of the Common Era, use AD or CE for the date at the end of the range (note that AD precedes the date and CE follows it). For example, 1 BCAD 1 or 1 BCE1 CE.

It is up to the author(s) of an article to determine the dating system to be used and there must be consistency with each article. In this case, for a non-Christian topic in a non-Christian region of the world, BCE/CE makes the most sense.

This is exactly the situation where BCE/CE is justified. Out of courtesy non-authors should not jump in and engage in revert wars over this. Zereshk is the primary author (having brought this from a stub to a viable article) and has indicated preference for BCE/CE notation. I think it is incumbent on members of the Wikipedia community to support authors who have something to contribute to a particular article. Sunray 16:28, 2005 May 22 (UTC)

Since the article has always had BC/AD before the very recent change - you argument to respect the authors would demand that it remains BC/AD. Personally, I prefer to think of the readers - but as in this case both approaches lead us to the conclusion that we should use BC/AD, that distinction is probably not important here. Kind regards, jguk 16:37, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
User:Zereshk supports these changes (Talk:List of kings of Persia, Talk:Iran). He is also an original author and/or significant contributor to many other provincial, city and historical articles. SouthernComfort 16:49, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Jguk said: "Since the article has always had BC/AD before the very recent change - you argument to respect the authors would demand that it remains BC/AD." You are mixing up two policies Jguk. One about dates and numbers, the other about civility to other authors. The policy on dates and numbers simply states that either BCE/CE are acceptable and enjoins writers to be consistent. The policy on treating fellow authors with respect is one of the fundamental policies of Wikipedia. If the authors of the article (past and present) have differences about the dating system, they would be well-advised to discuss it amongst themselves and get consensus. Sunray 17:12, 2005 May 22 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per request. - GTBacchus(talk) 17:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)



Hormozgān ProvinceHormozgan Province – per WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:USEENGLISH Takabeg (talk) 12:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hormozgan Province. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)