Bureaucrats, checkuser, Interface administrators, interwiki, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), staff, Suppressors, Administrators
83,693
edits
(as of) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) m (→Do you like it raw?: added reply) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
When providing a link to a wiki's statistics, is the raw count preferred, or the more user-friendly version? Obviously, it's up to the editor's discretion, but is there any advantage to providing the raw statistics without the accompanying explanations? --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 16:16, 6 October 2008 (EDT) | When providing a link to a wiki's statistics, is the raw count preferred, or the more user-friendly version? Obviously, it's up to the editor's discretion, but is there any advantage to providing the raw statistics without the accompanying explanations? --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 16:16, 6 October 2008 (EDT) | ||
: Raw is good for MediaWikis in rarely spoken languages i.e. Chinese, because raw is in "SimpleEnglish". --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 06:25, 21 December 2008 (EST) | : Raw is good for MediaWikis in rarely spoken languages i.e. Chinese, because raw is in "SimpleEnglish". --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 06:25, 21 December 2008 (EST) | ||
::Raw does <u>not</u> currently work on Wikia sites (it returns an unrecognised expression error message). And on non-Western language MediaWikis, raw does not always render numeric values in western digits - I end up looking up the data on the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#All_Wikipedias_ordered_by_number_of_articles meta table]. So my own personal experience is that raw is actually a detriment to the current template, and is currently serving no purpose! [[User:Hoof Hearted|Hoof Hearted]] 01:57, 21 June 2011 (PDT) | |||
== parameters without underscores == | == parameters without underscores == | ||
edits