Talk:Gilbert Vernam
|
|
I think the Wikipedia style guide recommends "a captain" rather than "a Captain" here: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Job_titles — Matt 17:32, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Matt, Didn't know there was a WP style guide on this point. But in this case it's wrong. In the US Army, one may have a rank, written Captain. I suppose one would be a captain in the longer history of military ranks. But, if referring to a particular person with this rank in the USA, he (or she) is a Captain. I think it works the same way in the Royal Navy, but I know so little about the British Army that things may be different there.
- The distinction seems to be that individual rank applying to a particular person is initial cap. So, Captain Smith, "Smith is a Captain". On the other hand, speaking of the rank generally, as in, "All the captains I've seen this week have been three sheets to the wind" or "The captains of industry have gathered to discuss export policy", would be lower case.
- I assure you that individuals in the USA care about this point.
- You might wish to amend the manual of style (they specifically solicit for exceptions) on this point.
- Welcome back, I've wondered about your absence.
- Thanks, I've been on holiday in Tanzania for a bit.
- I take it, that I have been missing some fine points in formatting the first versions of articles. I'll try to mend my ways.
- Well, content tends to be more useful than formatting, since there are many more capable copyeditors than there are those with specialist knowledge of topic X...Thanks for starting these articles, anyway. I don't suppose you'd be able to insert a link directly into List of cryptography topics on creation? Makes it a little easier to maintain the page. — Matt 18:11, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- ww 17:39, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
See also the discussion at Talk:Vernam cipher --agr 04:48, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)