2,014
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 43:
Line 43: +
→Cenozoic/cainozoic: remembering, of course, that these all are <6000 years old
::: Given that, I see no reason to change it.
::: Given that, I see no reason to change it.
:::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:53, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
:::[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:53, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
Not sure I was trying to put together a "rebuttal", I thought I was replying to "cheek". Anyway, interestingly enough, in your proofs you determined what this site should call it: "called Cenozoic in the USA". Non American spelling have been approved for articles that are commonwealth-centric. Either way, as long as the table develops, adds the time periods involved, I don't really care either way. By the way, googling "cenozoic" gets hit #2 at berkeley; #3 paleos.com, followed by a whole string of .edu's. Cainozoic gets an au site, followed by two 100 year old refs, and yet another cite to "see cenozoic". Whatever... [[User:Human|Human]] 00:32, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
==Crazy Superscripts==
==Crazy Superscripts==