Talk:Skaneateles Historic District

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York (state): Syracuse

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syracuse, New York, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Space[edit]

User:Beyond My Ken

We have discussed the issue with using hidden comments to add spaces after the links in ==External links== before the template, in which you consider this necessary to give a visual break per an improvement to the layout of the page. I started a discussion to clarify what the community's protocol is for such spacing use.

I mentioned the discussion here. I see no reason for the space to be there, and the community does not warrant such white space. Please revert.Curb Chain (talk) 07:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There have been numerous discussions, and there has never been a consensus that agreed with you, just a handful of people. You need to drop this idee fixe. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They have agreed with me. The discussion as I pointed out indicates it. You refused to contribute to the discussion. Please drop this intransigent attitude.Curb Chain (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We're done here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No we're not. I don't like the spacing comment either. There is now a consensus against. Feel free to remove it again, Curb Chain. Any other articles you happen to have this issue with? Yworo (talk) 08:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple editors over the years have issue with this idiosyncratic addition of a hidden comment in pure purpose to add a space which for the reasons are beyond me. It will surely be the articles that User:Beyond My Ken edits.Curb Chain (talk) 12:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed another problem that I saw, which is folding the "Further reading" section into "References" - since "Further reading" are materials which have not been used as references, this is actually misleading to the reader, who might be misled into thinking they have been used as sources. The proper way to move further reading items into references is to cite a fact in the article to them. In this way they are rather like see also items, which can and should be removed once linked from the article text. What do you think, Curb Chain? Yworo (talk) 14:51, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the correct definition of "Further reading" and "References". Your change are certainly improvements.Curb Chain (talk) 09:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]