Difference between revisions of "Help talk:Policies"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Suggestion of alternate formatting) |
m |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
: I think it looks a little cleaner. But as noted, they won't show up on the TOC. | : I think it looks a little cleaner. But as noted, they won't show up on the TOC. | ||
: - [[User:Mad|Mad]] 00:24, 15 November 2007 (EST) | : - [[User:Mad|Mad]] 00:24, 15 November 2007 (EST) | ||
*Heh, I noticed that myself but satisfied with just removing the heading on the 'no headings lol' one. :) Your way takes up less space, so maybe the TOC would be less necessary? --[[User:Stark|Stark]] 02:10, 15 November 2007 (EST) | |||
Latest revision as of 07:10, 15 November 2007
Good idea guys. I didn't realise the sub-headings thing worked with the contents section: anything that brings different elements of the policy to people's attention is great.--Stark 00:11, 15 November 2007 (EST)
- Though I really love the irony of "Please don't overuse headings. Every paragraph does not need a heading." on an article where every paragraph has a subheading. Before I saw your comment about the TOC, I was thinking of using definition lists (which won't show up on the TOC), as follows:
- Plagiarism
- It is totally unacceptable to cut and paste content from other websites. If you can't state ideas in your own words, leave a link to your source in the talk page and someone will look over it later.
- References
- Be sure to cite your sources: either list the print source and any relevant information such as page number, or a link to the website (see help for instructions).
- I think it looks a little cleaner. But as noted, they won't show up on the TOC.
- - Mad 00:24, 15 November 2007 (EST)
- Heh, I noticed that myself but satisfied with just removing the heading on the 'no headings lol' one. :) Your way takes up less space, so maybe the TOC would be less necessary? --Stark 02:10, 15 November 2007 (EST)