Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sources: Japanese language"
Rebollo fr (talk | contribs) (near-answer) |
(→Individual pages on magazines: KKS aside (for now), we're agreed then) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
:::I prefer the former ("Asahi Camera", etc.) It will be easier to link and "Asahi Camera" has its place in CP not only as a source but also as an actor of the photographic evolution. I have some doubts about KKS, though: leaving it under "Sources: ..." is not very coherent but this magazine is only interesting as a source. --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 07:16, 5 March 2007 (EST) | :::I prefer the former ("Asahi Camera", etc.) It will be easier to link and "Asahi Camera" has its place in CP not only as a source but also as an actor of the photographic evolution. I have some doubts about KKS, though: leaving it under "Sources: ..." is not very coherent but this magazine is only interesting as a source. --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 07:16, 5 March 2007 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::Let's go with "Asahi Camera", etc. I'll leave KKS unchanged for now. It could be changed too. A change would necessitate only a change to each of the dozen or so templates that point to it; compare this with "Asahi Camera" which could soon have a hundred or more links to it. -- [[User:Hoary|Hoary]] 09:42, 5 March 2007 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 14:42, 5 March 2007
Individual pages on magazines
The page on KKS has been joined by four others, and I could add more besides.
Now what, though? I hesitate to start linking to any of them until I'm certain that they are where they should be.
Any comments?
As for the content of these articles, I thought I'd try eventually to get around to describing one or two issues of each magazine, as has already been done with one recent issue of Asahi Camera. -- Hoary 08:50, 4 March 2007 (EST)
- This is a nice addition to the site. I'm not sure that it is needed to link every occurrence of the title "Asahi Camera" to the corresponding page, but you can certainly link the ones that fall in the "Bibliography" or "Sources" sections. I will certainly add the description of a really old issue of "Asahi Camera" soon. --Rebollo fr 17:10, 4 March 2007 (EST)
- OK; let's do this. I'll start with (can you guess?) the Takane articles. -- Hoary 18:45, 4 March 2007 (EST)
Indecisiveness as usual. . . .
"Sources: Japanese language/Asahi Camera" and so on seem rather unnecessarily long. The system works well with plain "Olympic" rather than "Japanese cameras/Olympic" or "Prewar cameras/Olympic" or whatever. Less typing and shorter URLs if we had just "Sources: Asahi Camera", etc. Would there be any drawbacks to this? -- Hoary 23:49, 4 March 2007 (EST)
- Probably not. Even the plain "Asahi Camera" would be fine: no confusion is possible with any company name or camera name. --Rebollo fr 03:16, 5 March 2007 (EST)
- That's true. So which shall we go with, "Asahi Camera" (etc), or "Sources: Asahi Camera" (etc)? -- Hoary 06:42, 5 March 2007 (EST)
- I prefer the former ("Asahi Camera", etc.) It will be easier to link and "Asahi Camera" has its place in CP not only as a source but also as an actor of the photographic evolution. I have some doubts about KKS, though: leaving it under "Sources: ..." is not very coherent but this magazine is only interesting as a source. --Rebollo fr 07:16, 5 March 2007 (EST)
- Let's go with "Asahi Camera", etc. I'll leave KKS unchanged for now. It could be changed too. A change would necessitate only a change to each of the dozen or so templates that point to it; compare this with "Asahi Camera" which could soon have a hundred or more links to it. -- Hoary 09:42, 5 March 2007 (EST)
