User talk:Amirza360
Hey, thanks for starting the Prunus rivularis article!
Welcome![edit]
Hello, Amirza360, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Melchoir (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
(Amirza360 (talk) 18:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC))
Help request[edit]
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
My question was regarding my sentences within wiki. There are a few scientific terms in my botony page that I would like to furthur define in brackets, right next to it, explaining the concept. I know this is not the standard norm of wikipedia in which terms are served as links to furthur define them, I wanted to define them on my page since this page is being used as a class assignment. For example, if I was talking about the hypanthium and its characterisitics, I would place a bracket after the word hypanthium to define what it is (floral tube consisiting of sepal and petals) Would this be acceptable?
- Sure, or depending on the structure of the sentence, a clause or a footnote could be used too. My personal style would be to use round brackets (that is, parentheses, as I'm doing here). Looking at your article, I'd personally find the explanation of hypanthium quite helpful. So long as they're not overwhelming (an article with a few dozen of these might get hard to read!), I can't imagine why they'd be considered a problem.
- Ahh, and let me add this. I would probably still include a link to the larger article. Think of them as having different purposes, the textual additions serve to help someone quickly and easily make use of the information in the article. The links are more useful to someone browsing, or who, perhaps after reading the article, wants to know more about some sub-topic or related topic. In this case, both would be perfectly acceptable. --joe deckertalk to me 19:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)