Talk:Ring of bells
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Musical Instruments articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article has been automatically rated as Stub-Class by WikiProject Musical Instruments because it uses a stub template.
|
The "As of 1988" formation is clumsy, poor English, and best avoided — but in so far as its use is sanctioned on Wikipedia, it's only in certain circumstances: "Usually as of is used only in cases where an article is intended to provide current information. It should not be used for historical information that is not intended to be updated." (Wikipedia:As of#Usage guidelines) --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed. But I was preseting the tower data as current information! Surely there's nothing special about April 2007 which warrants saving its tower data as "historical information that is not intended to be updated", right? Cheers, Doops | talk 23:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- As we're citing a particular edition of the book, the "as of" is already implied, surely. If the edition of the book is up-dated, then the material will be, but it's not as if we'll be up-dating the book edition without up-dating the reference to its content. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- No, I disagree -- if we were talking about something more or less immutable, like the height of Salisbury Cathedral, then of course you'd be right; it would be silly to say "as of 2007, the height is believed to be x". Sure, x could change, either because it's been remeasured, or because the cathedral is subsiding, or something like that; but we don't expect it to change. Here, though, the number of towers is constantly changing, albeit slowly. We don't want our article to "date". (Incidentally, too, Dove's guide is no longer published in print -- it's an online database, updated continuously.) Cheers, Doops | talk 15:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
-
But all As of April 2007 does is link to April 2007 ("April 2007 is the fourth month of 2007 A.D. It began on a Sunday and ended after thirty days on a Monday." etc.); what exactly does that add to the article? You seem happy to stick with the decent English "in 2007" over the ungainly "As of 2007", so as the link offers no relevant information, what's the point of it? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 23:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- As I understand there's a possibility that at some point in the future all the "as of x" links may serve as a useful tool for identifying articles that are "due" for an updating. But I admit I'm a little fuzzy on it all; I haven't spent a lot of time hanging around WP:AS OF. Doops | talk 23:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Hmmm, if so, perhaps we could wait until some such functionality is added? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
