17
edits
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Year"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
m |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::Ok, I guess your first comment makes sense. But in regards to "BF", that's something we use now, too (so it doesn't make "currently" more appropriate), not something used before the actual fall (for reasons I'm sure you can figure out). I guess the real issue is whether (and how) the years were kept track of before the fall. --[[User:Slurpz|Slurpz]] 00:59, 9 May 2008 (GMT) | ::Ok, I guess your first comment makes sense. But in regards to "BF", that's something we use now, too (so it doesn't make "currently" more appropriate), not something used before the actual fall (for reasons I'm sure you can figure out). I guess the real issue is whether (and how) the years were kept track of before the fall. --[[User:Slurpz|Slurpz]] 00:59, 9 May 2008 (GMT) | ||
:::Now that would be interesting! I still don't understand your use of "currently", unfortunately - I think we're going a bit too far on it. By "currently", our current (as in, right now, the present time) method of dating uses AF, period, so whether or not we still reference BF dates does not undermine our years as being AF. Does that make sense? [[User:Asara|Asara]] 02:09, 9 May 2008 (GMT) | :::Now that would be interesting! I still don't understand your use of "currently", unfortunately - I think we're going a bit too far on it. By "currently", our current (as in, right now, the present time) method of dating uses AF, period, so whether or not we still reference BF dates does not undermine our years as being AF. Does that make sense? [[User:Asara|Asara]] 02:09, 9 May 2008 (GMT) | ||
::::Perfectly. _my_ point however was that AF and BF are used concurrently, so it doesn't make usage of the term "currently" any more appropriate (since there was never a transition between usage of "BF" to usage of "AF"); I'm not denouncing "currently" as an inappropriate term, though. --[[User:Slurpz|Slurpz]] 02:26, 9 May 2008 (GMT) | |||