This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArcticWikipedia:WikiProject ArcticTemplate:WikiProject ArcticArctic articles
I said elsewhere on the page that spelling out small numbers and their units--e.g., "four grams" rather than "4 g"--is preferred, though not mandated. So I won't fight you on this, though I prefer that they be spelled out. You are a cruel, cruel man. Babajobu03:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, now. Here's what you actually said on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy): " Numbers are never spelled out as parts of measurements that use abbreviations or symbols. Thus, you can happily write "8 km", if you prefer, rather than "eight kilometers". And--I emphasize this again--you can use all the 1s and 2s and 3s you want in scientific articles."
In another message you said, "I'd be happy to defer to the NIST guidelines for scientific articles."
In yet aother message you claimed (though I doubt the truth of the statement at the time it was made, though you did say it a few times later on), " I've said several times that mathematic and scientific articles need not spell out numbers under one hundred."
So why were you changing those in this particular scientific article?
You also hadn't made the incorrect claim about the spelled out versions being "preferred, though not mandated" in this situation, until after I reverted you here and called you on your incorrect edit on the village pump page. Gene Nygaard07:32, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see if I can help you sort this all out. I made the comment about spelled out versions being "preferred, though not mandated" in a response to User:ran on the Policy page before you made your confused accusation of "incorrect edits". This is because in non-scientific articles it is preferable to spell out both the number and the unit. However, it is acceptable to abbreviate the unit and use numerals. However you may not abbreviate the unit while spelling out the number. Abbreviated units are never paired with spelled out numbers. Hence in a non-scientific article "four grams" is preferred, while "4 g" is acceptable. Because Barren Ground Shrew has relatively few numbers I treat it as a non-scientific article: however, I was willing to let you keep your version "4 g", since "four grams" is only preferred, not required. But then I took stock of your personality, and decided not to extend you that courtesy. All very logical, all very consistent. Babajobu11:27, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
