AVID:Requests for Comment/Standardise all dates

Standardise all dates
A prior RfC and one running currently as of this writing propose using different date formats (MDY, DMY and YMD) depending on the principal country of an article. I believe this may cause confusion down the line, mainly in regard to relying on context to know when a nn/nn/nn format date refers to, and when building articles, also having to seek out the system a country uses in order to apply dates correctly. I don't believe it's important which date format is picked for all articles to use, but that editors do not need to think about which formats to use and that edge cases involving nn/nn/nn format dates do not confuse readers. Chloafifteen (talk) 11:24, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) . We need consistency, and utilising a single system across AVID would work better than trying to appease every single individual group. Eternity Media Group (talk) 08:51, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) more consistency is needed in this wiki. We shouldn't make it hard for other users Logoarto (talk) 13:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) per others. T807sig.png · Talk · Edits 17:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) We use those date formats accordingly (specifically the MDY and DMY formats as of now; the YMD RfC hasn't been closed yet). America, Canada, and the Philippines all use the MDY format, while the UK and Australia have the DMY format and Japan uses the YMD format (the latter will be implemented if the YMD RfC is passed). Therefore, I have to be out. --AUnnamedDragon 1:56 PM, September 5, 2023 (CET)
 * Can you explain why you're out? I'm already aware we use multiple formats, that's why I made this RfC. I believe it doesn't serve any use to be intentionally using several formats at once. Chloafifteen (talk) 18:31, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * My reason is very clear from my vote alone. --AUnnamedDragon 2:39 PM, September 5, 2023 (CET)
 * You've told me you're opposed but I'm not sure why. Chloafifteen (talk) 19:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Allow me to clarify the concern: The vote states what formats are in use but does not explain why they have to be presented in these different ways. This RfC argues for consistency in how this information is presented to the average reader. If you want to be actually clear then this is what you need to address. Your only argument at the moment is "...this is how it is". --Raidarr (talk) 13:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Sorry to say, but I didn't understand what you said (not a joke). TPatKB (AKA Mr Vadimon) (this is my talk page) 18:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Then you should use the comments to ask for clarification, or refrain from casting a position, rather than make an invalid oppose on a matter you don't understand. --Raidarr (talk) 13:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, I wish. But since there's that RFC about using MDY and DMY dates depending on the country that had passed, I'd have to say no for now. Gilby1385 (talk) 14:40, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Per EMG: "I'd say in that case we check the support/oppose ratio and the one with with greater support passes". Just to clarify, you're opposing an RfC you'd otherwise support just because of this? Chloafifteen (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I opposed because I interpreted the RFC as "revert all dates back to MDY format", which I wasn't really in favour of since the RFC to use DMY had passed, so I guess I was. Gilby1385 (talk) 18:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * ...that is literally not how this works. This entire section leaves me disappointed in the quality of AVID users thinking through proposals and I will be considering how the process could be changed to avoid vapid voting. --Raidarr (talk) 14:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Please use the comments to point this out instead of opposing. You can support both: it's not mutually exclusive. T807sig.png · Talk ·Edits 17:56, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, right. Gilby1385 (talk) 18:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)