Do not revert the longhand dates into the DD/MM/YYYY update notes as some people were getting confused with the MM/DD/YYYY format.
additonally do not underline or bold the date as it messes up the wikitext coding in classic editor (the underlined date bullet points indentates the next bullet point which messes up the the look of the update notes).
"Do not". So serious.
Anyway,
The numeric date format in day before month has been standard for a while. The ONLY reason "some people" are confused is because Americans are inserting month before day dates.
If you won't use underline, how about bold formatting to make dates easier to read? I sure as hell won't be scrolling through a long page's update history, with the dates being almost identical in appearance to the update log, to find a specific log.
TheSeal27 wrote:
"Do not". So serious.
Anyway,
The numeric date format in day before month has been standard for a while. The ONLY reason "some people" are confused is because Americans are inserting month before day dates.
If you won't use underline, how about bold formatting to make dates easier to read? I sure as hell won't be scrolling through a long page's update history, with the dates being almost identical in appearance to the update log, to find a specific log.
bolding should be fine
