Template talk:Q

Terrible

This template is terrible. I'm not sure where the underlying form is, but wherever it is:

(a) I, personally, would argue against use of the pedantic ce and bce format at all.

(b) Failing that, the format should be able to be toggled from one format to the other.

(c) Regardless of the community consensus on the above, neither ad/ce should display by default. Neither one should display for most entries and whichever (or both) should be available only in situations (such as classical Latin quotations) where there is a real possibility of confusion whether a date might refer to bc or ad.

(d) Regardless of the community consensus on the above, the current formatting is atrocious. It's fine that the date to display in bold but there's no reason for the era to do so and certainly no reason to use FULL BOLD CAPITALS for it. 403 CE is fine; better still 403 ce (not that ce should display at all by default).

 — LlywelynII 08:06, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

For what it's worth, most of the initial languages coded to use this template are classical languages, e.g. Ancient Greek, Latin, Old Armenian. Hence, the distinction between BC/BCE and AD/CE. Personally, I don't have a strong preference between the two, but CE/BCE do seem to be more common in professional academic publications. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 18:26, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

year

The year= parameter does not work for me. --Vahag (talk) 10:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)