Talk:Glossary of linear algebra
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Internal links
[edit]Many definitions in this glossary contain terms defined the glossary. Normally these terms should be linked to the definition in the glossary. Instead of using [[...]], for these internal links, I suggest to use {{gli}}. The link is less visible (undelined with a dashed blue line), but this allows distinguishing it from external links.
I have used the template in section § L, for testing the method and providing examples. D.Lazard (talk) 10:28, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- I completely agree with this; it also less obtrusive. Another issue with linking that I was unaware of when I copied the glossary here is the guideline in Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Glossaries#Outgoing_links that terms should generally not be linked. I am unsure how I feel about this, though. Felix QW (talk) 10:59, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- I believe that this part of a guideline is partially outdated. In particular, it seems to have been written before the introduction of the second parameter of the template {{term}}. Indeed, the syntax
{{term|anchor name|displayed name}}or{{term|1=anchor name|2=displayed name}}allows avoiding any conflict between anchor syntax and style modifiers. It seems that, with the current implementation of the templates, the internal links work well even if the term is piped. However, it will be safer to split the linked parameter, thet is, for example, to change{{term|1=[[Basis (linear algebra)|Basis]]}}into{{term|basis|[[Basis (linear algebra)]|Basis]]}}. - It seems that linking from terms are discouraged (see the deprecated example in template:term#Wiki-styling and linking of the term), but not forbidden. In our case, following this guideline would need to rewrite almost all definitions for including the linked term in the definition. As adding the numerous lacking items has a higher priority, I suggest to not follows this recommendation for the moment. D.Lazard (talk) 14:05, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- I believe that this part of a guideline is partially outdated. In particular, it seems to have been written before the introduction of the second parameter of the template {{term}}. Indeed, the syntax
ungrammatical
[edit]This glossary is ungrammatical by capitalizing every term including ones that aren't proper nouns. Look at dictionaries and most higher academic glossaries on Wikipedia and you'll see they only capitalize names/titles such as people and named places. While it's true in academic usage an entire term (like a department or field/subject) may be capitalized, in casual usage, they're not. The entries also aren't sentences (just are like dictionary entries) so it's incorrect to capitalize only the first word. Pick one usage: casual (probably) or academic (if you really want, but isn't all usage) and stick to it. This whole thing needs reformatting for grammar.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 01:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)