Disputatio Formulae:Praenomina Romana
Appearance
Abbreviationes
[fontem recensere]Is there a need to keep separate pages for the abbreviations, or should they be redirects? Lesgles (disputatio) 15:59, 20 Iunii 2016 (UTC)
- They could be redirects (or discretiva pages if appropriate). This formula could be adjusted so that the abbreviations point directly to the main page, e.g. [[Marcus|M.]]. I'd have no objection to that. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:59, 20 Iunii 2016 (UTC)
- What do you think of the current format? I copied the list from en:Praenomen#Latin praenomina. If you think the two row format is better, I can also try making that. Lesgles (disputatio) 21:30, 1 Iulii 2016 (UTC)
- I think that for a foot-of-page navbox the row format is convenient and it's probably better not to vary it. We perhaps achieve a more professional look that way. I think, too, that navboxes should aim to give quick links to the source of information (the page) and in that context it makes sense to have (1) a list of abbreviations plus (2) a list of full spellings, both rapid-access. Go to the page to find out more. But you may well disagree!
- I just checked, though, that the four-column layout works with mobile view. Yes, it does. This is important, because in mobile view navboxes are currently the only category-type navigation available. Poor old en:wiki has neither categories nor navboxes in mobile view.
- The number of very rare names (= names that I had never heard of :=) is a surprise! The hard work seems to have been done by P Aculeius on en:wiki, and it looks solidly based. The handiest source that I can see is the article by Chase, which he often cites. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:05, 2 Iulii 2016 (UTC)
- OK, I redid the row format with the new names; I do agree that the compact look is better. I did point the abbreviations to the main page, as you suggested (since I think few people are really interested in the abbreviations per se). I also changed "abbreviationes" to the classical "notae."
- This version of the navbox also works in mobile view, for me at least, although it does get hidden under the last section, whether Bibliographia or Nexus externi.
- Chase does seem like a pretty good source; it would probably be good to include him in all the pages. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:48, 2 Iulii 2016 (UTC)
- "Notae" is the proper term, as you say. Looks good. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:01, 2 Iulii 2016 (UTC)
- What do you think of the current format? I copied the list from en:Praenomen#Latin praenomina. If you think the two row format is better, I can also try making that. Lesgles (disputatio) 21:30, 1 Iulii 2016 (UTC)