Editing Encyclopedia:Measurements Debate (section)

==A succinct solution==

Either use:
1) Metric units only
2) Metric units with imperial units in parentheses

The consensus above seems to be that metric should be given most favoured measurement system status, so is there anyone who can't live with this very simple solution? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kennethmac2000|Kennethmac2000]] ([[User talk:Kennethmac2000|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kennethmac2000|contribs]]) July 2, 2005 23:46 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:I'm not sure how you see anything resembling a consensus above other than that metric units are appropriate in all articles. I think the best compromise is that the most accurate figures (or those used in source materials) should be given first, and if those figures are non-metric, provide the metric equivalent in parenthesis, and where appropriate, if the metric units are given first, provide non-metric equivalents in parentheses. [[User:Bkonrad|older]]≠[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]] July 3, 2005 02:42 (UTC)

:: I agree [[User:Bkonrad|older]]≠[[User talk:Bkonrad|wiser]].  We cannot impose metric on the US contributors it makes no sense, nevertheless, we can all agree on a compromise.  An example of a contribution from the US that is well intentioned can be found at the [[Athletics_at_the_1988_Summer_Olympics| 1988 Olympic results]].  This page only reports track and field (athletics) throws and jumps in imperial.  This is illogical since the original distances were measured in metric.  This user has converted the distances to allow US readers a better understanding of the distances and heights involved and should be lauded for this effort.  But why remove the metric measurements making this article next to incomprehensible to a non-US reader?  I have edited the [[Athletics_at_the_1984_Summer_Olympics| 1984 Olympic results]], by the same user, to reflect what I believe is the compromise we should be seeking.  

::I will add that I created a similar page for the [[1986_European_Championships_in_Athletics| 1986 European athletic championships]] but I did not add the imperial equivalents.  This is pretty much in line with the metric only stance. The assumption on my behalf is that few US contributors would find this page interesting and it is time consuming to convert all the heights and distances.  If, however, a US contributor wants to do those conversions and add them to the article I would not complain. If there is an equivalent US event that only measures in feet and inches, for example, longest distance jumped by [[Evel_Knievel]], then I don't have a problem with the imperial measurement taking priority.  And if people wish to add the metric version in parentheses this would be appropriate.  I do think it would be inappropriate to either convert it to metric only or put metric first with imperial in brackets.   

:::Actually the Evel Knievel reference is a bad example since his measurement units are some of the worst I have ever seen. ''"On February 28, he set a new world record by jumping 19 cars in Ontario, California. On May 10, Knievel crashed while attempting to jump 13 Pepsi delivery trucks"''.  Of course there is no mention of the width of these cars?  My guess is they were on the thin side but who knows?  This is a good example of poor units making comparisons impossible.  As someone mentioned above in section [[Wikipedia:Measurements_Debate#Imperial_US_vs_UK| Imperial_US_vs_UK]], ''"The advantage of the metric system is that it is unambiguous"''.  This sums up the argument perfectly.  [[User:Daycd|David D.]] 3 July 2005 15:39 (UTC)

:Sounds like a very reasonable compromise. Removing the metric unit conversions provided for some US articles is pointless and misguided if Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. --[[User:Rolandg|RolandG]] 07:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)