Talk:International System of Units/Archives/01/2013

Replacement of "Cultural issues" with "Post-1960 changes"

I have replaced the section "Cultural issues" with a new section "Post 1960 changes" in which I have tried to take as many of the issues from "Cultural issues" that have a global impact and put them into perspective and at the same time show how and why SI has grown. I have also removed the map as it shows countries that have adopted the metric system, but not countries that have formally adopted SI. I am currently working on a new section to replace the section "International trade" which I have entitled "Worldwide adoption" in which I look at the US, the UK & Commonweaslth, ther EU and India's adoption of SI. (If you like visting building sites, feel free to look at my sandbox).

I trust that none of this invalidates the article's current "B" classification. Martinvl (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

In the notes section: "International Electrotechnical Commission (IRC)" should be replaced with: "International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.81.151.145 (talk) 12:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Done (also reformatted last posting) Martinvl (talk) 20:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Citations

In view of the large number of references to the SI Brochure and the NIST SI publication and the large overlap between these two publications, I am listing these two publications at the head of the references section and then using short citations to reference both documents, for example

"SI Brochure, op cit, p123; NIST op cit, p45".

This will enable the reader to see whether or not there is an overlap. Any comments? Martinvl (talk) 06:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I imagine the normal way would be to treat the the short citations as notes in the section above referring to the references, rather than to list them under the references section. I'm sure there must be a standard style for exactly this (e.g. see this WP guideline). — Quondum 11:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I use this type of citation for repeated citatiosn quite frequently, but in this case I want to get multiple citations from the same document, but from different page numbers. In particular I looked at the article Op. cit. Martinvl (talk) 12:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

You'll see what I'm referring to if you follow through the guideline to the example here, where you'll see various page numbers listed under "Notes", citing shared reference(s) under "References". Just my suggestion; proceed as you wish. What I do agree with is the idea of avoiding duplication of the actual reference. — Quondum 15:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I think you can use Template:Rp (reference pages) to do this. Djr32 (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)