Difference between revisions of "Talk:Houghton and Ensign"
Rebollo fr (talk | contribs) (suggestions) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:You're right. My approach would be to decide of group Houghton(s), Houghton-Butcher, Barnet-Ensign, Barnet Ensign Ross and Ross-Ensign together in one page called "Houghton". We would have to merge the current contents of [[Houghton]], [[Houghton-Butcher]] and [[Ross-Ensign]]. We can keep a separate page for [[Ross]], describing the pre-1948 Ross cameras, and perhaps all of Ross lenses. We can also keep a page for the [[Sanderson]] cameras before the merge, and we probably need a separate page for the early [[Butcher]]. Once the scope of the pages is settled, we can complete the camera list, and make it categorized rather than alphabetical. --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 05:36, 22 April 2008 (EDT) | :You're right. My approach would be to decide of group Houghton(s), Houghton-Butcher, Barnet-Ensign, Barnet Ensign Ross and Ross-Ensign together in one page called "Houghton". We would have to merge the current contents of [[Houghton]], [[Houghton-Butcher]] and [[Ross-Ensign]]. We can keep a separate page for [[Ross]], describing the pre-1948 Ross cameras, and perhaps all of Ross lenses. We can also keep a page for the [[Sanderson]] cameras before the merge, and we probably need a separate page for the early [[Butcher]]. Once the scope of the pages is settled, we can complete the camera list, and make it categorized rather than alphabetical. --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 05:36, 22 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::No. First we need a page "Butcher". Don't put everything into the Houghton-pot. Its an idea like Awcam's Instamatic page to make a list of all Ensign brand cameras separately. Thus the structure Houghton, Houghton-Butcher, and Ross-Ensign can stay was worked out. It's just the list of Ensign cameras which fills the Houghton-Butcher page inappropriately. U. Kulick 14:59, 22 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 18:59, 22 April 2008
This is a mess; there is a lot of overlap between the Sanderson, Houghton, Barnet Ensign, Ross, Barnet Ensign Ross and Ross-Ensign. We are also missing pages for a vast range of cameras under the Ensign and related names, many of which would fit into several of the makers categories.
If anyone has any more models, please add them; some rationalisation of the pages and links between them possibly needs to wait on getting a more comprehensive list of cameras and their origins. Overall, this is a very significant group of makers and ought to have better coverage. I will look for more stuff.
--Awcam 21:28, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
- You're right. My approach would be to decide of group Houghton(s), Houghton-Butcher, Barnet-Ensign, Barnet Ensign Ross and Ross-Ensign together in one page called "Houghton". We would have to merge the current contents of Houghton, Houghton-Butcher and Ross-Ensign. We can keep a separate page for Ross, describing the pre-1948 Ross cameras, and perhaps all of Ross lenses. We can also keep a page for the Sanderson cameras before the merge, and we probably need a separate page for the early Butcher. Once the scope of the pages is settled, we can complete the camera list, and make it categorized rather than alphabetical. --Rebollo fr 05:36, 22 April 2008 (EDT)
- No. First we need a page "Butcher". Don't put everything into the Houghton-pot. Its an idea like Awcam's Instamatic page to make a list of all Ensign brand cameras separately. Thus the structure Houghton, Houghton-Butcher, and Ross-Ensign can stay was worked out. It's just the list of Ensign cameras which fills the Houghton-Butcher page inappropriately. U. Kulick 14:59, 22 April 2008 (EDT)
