User talk:Jarred C Lloyd/Articles/GeologicTimeScale Terminology
Comments on draft article edit
Thanks for working on a revision of this article.
In response to your request on my Talk page for help/feedback about your draft revision of this article, I have some comments (more could follow):
Introduction section.
First sentence. I think this could be improved by a very brief explanation of the terms "chronostratigraphy" and "geochronology", in parentheses, in addition to their existing wikilinks.
"The current version of the ICC can be found at stratigraphy.org/chart." - should be moved to an External links section.
Terminology section.
According to the Manual of Style, bold font should not be used for emphasis (see MOS:BOLD). It is intended for section headings and targets of redirects. Emphasis should be achieved by italic font instead. i.e. for the terms: Chronostratigraphy, chronostratigraphic unit, Geochronology, geochronologic unit, Geochronometry, Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA).
— GeoWriter (talk) 19:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for these initial comments, I'll make those adjustments on my next edit. I'm planning to effectively port the sections from the current GTS article, and improve, update, and/or reorder the sections in a way I think will improve the article overall. It's turned into a much bigger project than was the initial goal, but one I think is necessary and worth the time. Jarred C Lloyd (talk) 06:37, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- I notice that you have added the following templates to your draft version: "Use Australian English", "Use British English" and "use dmy dates". Apart from the obvious that only one English variety should be used in an article (see MOS:ARTCON), English varieties and date formats should not be changed if the subject of an article has no strong local connection. The geologic time scale applies worldwide so the article should continue to use the existing language variety and date format i.e. American (e.g. "geologic", "Archean", "Paleogene"). see MOS:ENGVAR, especially MOS:RETAIN. GeoWriter (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've removed these tags. I really just had them there for anyone who ends up helping with any drafting as it is quicker for me to use "commonwealth" spelling conventions (typing muscle memory) given the fairly substantial revisions I've done already, and am continuing to work on. On the international aspect, I would prefer to use Oxford spelling given that is considered to be the most "standard/non-regional" English, but I understand the MOS:RETAIN aspect and that IF I wanted to implement oxford convention on the page it would need to be via consensus. Regardless of that, I'll make sure that the spelling is correct to either Am Eng, or Ox Eng (if changed) during proofreading, prior to implementing the revised article within the current GTS page.
- I will go through and change the geologic time names now as they follow the non -ae spellings on the ICC anyway. Jarred C Lloyd (talk) 07:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- I notice that you have added the following templates to your draft version: "Use Australian English", "Use British English" and "use dmy dates". Apart from the obvious that only one English variety should be used in an article (see MOS:ARTCON), English varieties and date formats should not be changed if the subject of an article has no strong local connection. The geologic time scale applies worldwide so the article should continue to use the existing language variety and date format i.e. American (e.g. "geologic", "Archean", "Paleogene"). see MOS:ENGVAR, especially MOS:RETAIN. GeoWriter (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)