Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Levelledout (talk | contribs) at 03:08, 20 December 2014 (Add archive box). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Sections

Can you please alter the sections to reflect what BR and I agreed to. Put Usage first and we can work out the language next. AlbinoFerret 19:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I've read through the discussion and it definitely would seem to me that whilst you were proposing Usage (statistics) to go at the top, Bluerasberry was proposing that Uses (Medical indications etc) should go at the top of the article. I'm not sure whether the two of you realised at any point that you were both referring to entirely different sections. However I note that there was eventually some agreement that a section called Usage should go at the top. I will change the edit request but am going to make clear that this issue of Usage/Uses still needs to be sorted out.Levelledout (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

AlbinoFerret I did not clear the difference in explanation on "uses" with Albinoferret but in my opinion, any interpretation of "uses" would be a good first section. I favor starting the article with an explanation of why the product is used, how it works, then physically what it is. These could be "uses" and "construction" sections. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:38, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: I dont have a problem with a simple section called Uses that basically follows the first paragraph in the lede without all the "aerosol" definitions being first. I think we can come to an agreement on the wording relatively quickly. If we need wording for now just use the first paragraph in the lede and we can modify it later. AlbinoFerret 20:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)