User talk:A Fellow Editor/Template:Quantity/sandbox

Carry over from #New_template thread...

A bit of snooping has revealed an existing... ^[quantify] ...(Template:Quantify & Template:Quantify/doc). In light of that discovery {quantity} doesn't seem very distinct ("t" vs. "f"). Although {enumerate} and/or {provide number} might work to distinguish, after reading a bit I'm starting to wonder if improvement/addition to the 'destination page(s)' of existing templated terms, like... ^[quantify] ... might be a route to focus on. --Kevjonesin (talk) 05:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...and then maybe add some additional terms as name redirects. --Kevjonesin (talk) 05:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel guilty for starting this mess and not carrying on. Feel free to edit as you see fit. We yet need a few more specific ones as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"I feel guilty..." 'Ditto' as my brainstorms helped muddy the water. I may be able to give it some attention this week. Meanwhile, here's a link to the previous (archived) discussion— 2013_April_21#New_template. --Kevjonesin (talk) 00:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Canoe1967, I like your straightforward... ^{{number(s) needed}} ...as per #New_template. Something like 'enumerate' is probably much to 'flowery' and hence may fail to reach it's target audience. While I may happen to enjoy '$5 words', I also recognize that in practical situations they may simply obfusc... err... get in the way. : }

As for "destination page(s)' of existing templated terms", I was referring mostly to how... ^[quantify] ...leads to MOS:NUM which in some cases may be a whole lot of (overwhelming) info to make a simple point. And it doesn't actually directly address the issue you raised anyhow. There is a #Precise_language subsection but it's under #Chronological_items and deals specifically with such. The shortcut to it is "WP:DATED".

I'm giving thought and likely action to adding a subsection, along with it's own shortcut, to MOS:NUM which would directly and clearly address 'lack of specific measurement' instances like the one your [Canoe1967's] Brooklyn Bridge example pointed out. I'm gonna' do a bit of exploring first though as I'm guessing it's best to tread lightly when editing the WP:MOS. I wanna' get the format right and snoop for redundancy elsewhere and such. Feedback and/or assistance is welcome. --Kevjonesin (talk) 16:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather that more synonyms be added to the Quantify template than a new template be created, if it’s felt that it’s not sufficiently self-explanatory as it is: just adding e.g. “how much” to the existing “how many”–also suggested at the Help Desk discussion was “size?”, which also works for me—would cover all of the examples given AFAIC, including the OP’s Brooklyn Bridge. Whether or not it should link to MOS:NUM is another question; I’m not clear on the reasoning behind this, as AFAICT none of the other templates of this kind link to the respectively relevant guidelines.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:29, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

links to associated discussions

I posted links back to this page along with notes asking for input at both WikiProject Manual of Style and Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. --Kevjonesin (talk) 17:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Looks like it has been tagged for speedy deletion. Can we just modify the existing templates as stated above and delete this one? --Canoe1967 (talk) 23:01, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]