This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article was accepted on 14 April 2012 by reviewer Sionk (talk·contribs).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cardiff, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cardiff-related articles 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.CardiffWikipedia:WikiProject CardiffTemplate:WikiProject CardiffCardiff articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There are two dates within this article that have been stated using a BP dating scheme. It is entirely unnecessary to rehearse the pros and cons of such a scheme here as it is actively debated on the talk page of the BP article it references. What concerns me is that the usage is not reflected in any of the sources that these dates are quoted from, and must therefore have been calculated by an editor. It is the ambition of any good wikipedia page to accurately reflect the information in its sources, and coherently convey that information to readers. I cannot see how that process is helped by altering the dating scheme in this way to a method that is not used by any published writing about Caurau. Some further sources on BP usage of the Caurau dating would be appreciated. RobinLeicester (talk) 01:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Personally, I absolutely detest this PC dating system! This entire article is ruined by it (for the reasons clearly detailed by the other comment) and it needs changing to BC, AD or (deep breath) BCE or CE. Articles should be accessible, and this one is currently irritating due to this horrible system that Wiki seems so tolerant of. Davidkt (talk) 17:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
since no further contributions to this issue have been left, and the sources are clear and in concensus, I have re-set the dates to BC. RobinLeicester (talk) 11:25, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
.svg)
