Talk:E. B. Ford

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

History of Science Low‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Evolutionary biology Low‑importance

	Evolutionary biology portal This article is part of WikiProject Evolutionary biology, an attempt at building a useful set of articles on evolutionary biology and its associated subfields such as population genetics, quantitative genetics, molecular evolution, phylogenetics, and evolutionary developmental biology. It is distinct from the WikiProject Tree of Life in that it attempts to cover patterns, process and theory rather than systematics and taxonomy. If you would like to participate, there are some suggestions on this page (see also Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information) or visit WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biologyWikipedia:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyTemplate:WikiProject Evolutionary biologyEvolutionary biology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ecology Low‑importance

	Ecology portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Lepidoptera Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lepidoptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of butterflies and moths 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.LepidopteraWikipedia:WikiProject LepidopteraTemplate:WikiProject LepidopteraLepidoptera articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

E.B. Ford → E. B. Ford – Naming conventions -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Oppose there is no consensus on whether articles with initials should have _ indeed (whatever koavf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) thinks), the more common way is without the underscore. — Dunc|☺ 15:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unneccessary, in line with no clear policy I can find, and does not add to clarity. Naturenet | Talk 20:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support: See my comment below. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Add any additional comments

The convention itself Is located here. See also that the majority of articles (and, in particular, virtually all the ones with many edits) are in the form "X. Y. Lastname." Regardless of what Duncharris (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) says, I think that WP:Be bold leads me to move such pages in keeping with a standard that was already written, regardless of consensus. I only put this here after being convinced it was a gesture of good will. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to split hairs and I do applaud your attempt to enforce a standard. However the reference you gave itself refers to another page of conventions and the two are not consistent, the latter page giving examples of both styles with apparent approval. Nowhere is the specific point of spacing addressed except by unannotated example. I do not believe there is a consensus on whether or not there should be spaces in names formatted like E.B. Ford. I suggest that the reason there is no such consensus nor likely to be one is because it is a trivial issue. Therefore it is not worth moving a page to achieve compliance. Naturenet | Talk 19:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sway to and fro on this issue but I have to admit the wording in this section of WP:NCP is quite clear. "For abbreviated names (if these are the most used) every abbreviation is followed by a point, and every point is followed by a single space" — and the boldface is in the convention itself, not added by me. There is only one exception shown in the convention, B.G. James, and that article has since been moved to Brian Gerard James. In one of these move requests, I pointed out that every source I could find had no space in the middle but the ruling still went against me. Personally, I would have moved this page since the opposes were unconvincing. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I'm wrong, the guidelines are unambiguous. I withdraw any objection on grounds of policy. I would still assert that this entire thing is de minimus. Naturenet | Talk 17:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved per discussion. Special thanks to Wknight94 for participation :) Teke^(talk) 00:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Life

"...but there are few other sources on his life." The ODNB gives a few interesting personal references. Chrysippo (talk) 10:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on E. B. Ford. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:37, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]