This page needs some definite cleanup in the way of removing unnecessary "Template:" tags. I'll try to get around to that in the next day or so. In addition, can we squash the "earlier version" note at the end of this article? While I appreciate James Allan Evans' contributions, having a note like that, especially with characters that refuse to render except as ?s, seems rather unprofessional to me. Unless someone thinks we should keep it, I'll probably remove that note in the next couple days, as well. -Jonas Wisser 02:03, 10 February 2007 (CST)
Please don't; we should credit the original source of the article. I don't know what you are referring to with regard to the ?s. --Larry Sanger 17:38, 24 February 2007 (CST)
- Never mind; someone removed the bit I was talking about without removing the attribution; an elegant solution if ever there was one. --jwisser 12:41, 28 February 2007 (CST)
What are these, and why remove a non-top category in favor of its "top" sibling? -jwisser 17:34, 24 February 2007 (CST)
- While I was removing the interwiki links, I also removed the non-top category on Herodotus because that seemed to be the practice that I have seen elsewhere, namely, to put the article in either Top or non-top but not both. Now that it has been brought to my attention, it does seem more logical to put Top articles in both. And now it appears there will be some changes in WG cats overall.
- I'm going to be working on the Classics WG home page in the next few days. Care to help? James F. Perry 20:42, 24 February 2007 (CST)
You can ignore them for now. I think we're going to scrap them--I haven't heard any objections to the suggestion that we do so (on the Forums). Just use the non-top category. --Larry Sanger 17:37, 24 February 2007 (CST)