0

Let's say I'm talking about the duration of Hinduism - I've taken the "beginning" date as the 19th century BC, so I've currently written:

(19th century BC - )

I don't know if there is a precedent for how I'm meant to write that the event is ongoing. Perhaps:

(19th century BC - now) or (19th century BC - today)

Many thanks in advance

Gabe
  • 1
  • Both "now" and "today" are used and are equally valid. Only the over-pedantic would nitpick the difference between the two in this context. – KillingTime Sep 10 '21 at 10:52
  • 2
    I don't know if it's a "site standard", but I note that when I look up a living person on Wikipedia, the "Years active" is presented as 1957–present. But many publications don't put any additional text at all after the dash of a start/end-date-range where "end date = now". – FumbleFingers Sep 10 '21 at 11:14
  • While the linked page explains how to use this format for something ongoing, if one needs to use it, it would be highly unusual to actually use it for something like Hinduism. – jsw29 Sep 10 '21 at 16:15
  • Whatever you do don't put the current date in the 'to' position as that would indicate that the period has come to an end today, particularly if the piece can be read after today. You sometimes see that on sites like Wikipedia where a famous person has died and their page has been updated as soon as the news has been received. – BoldBen Sep 11 '21 at 09:51

0 Answers0