|This is the discussion page for Instamatic.
Created this page to unify list of instamatics, from US, AG and Ltd; the idea being that looking at lists on several different country pages was not sensible if you did not know where the camera came from in the first place.
There was already a link to this page on the 126 film page; added one on the Kodak page in the history section.
Made by searching Camerapedia for Instamatic, then Sylvain Hagland's site, my own collection, and finally a little Googling. In making it, I discovered several camerapedia pages not apparently linked to from any of the Kodak pages.
The problem with this is that there is now the same data in two places - in the lists on the Kodak country sites and here; very bad computer science. Three ways to alleviate this:
- carefully update both places, coming back to monitor it frequently
- delete this page
- break the country pages down a bit to refer to separate lists (like this one) which perhaps have the countries delineated somehow.
- (forthly) optimistic approach: leave it as it is and see what happens.
-- User:Awcam 16:18, 11 march 2007 GMT.
- I think that this page is really useful, and I don't think that having similar data in two places is that much of a problem. Many things at Camerapedia are not automated and need to be updated by hand, but this is usually not a problem because monitoring the changes is actually quite easy. I would thus recommend the optimistic approach!
- I however think that we should not have one red link for each model. This gives the impression that having one page per Instamatic model is something we want, and I'm not sure this is a good option. I would find it better to have pages describing a series of related models, explaining where do they fit in the general evolution of the Instamatic cameras. For example from the name I guess that the 104, 204, 304, etc. form a range of related cameras, and I would find it sensible to have one page for each range.
- --Rebollo fr 06:35, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
- Yes - I was going to remove the non-existent pagelinks later; leaving them in made the editing easier. I had intended to make the very similar models the same page (e.g. 133 & 133X), but I agree, there's probably more mileage in larger groups.
- -- User:Awcam 13:18, 12 March 2007 GMT
Unsigned, hidden comment that was within the article until moments ago (when I removed it):
- <!-- surely there's a proper mediawiki way to write a table? -->
Yes there is. It will soon be explained within a page I am working on now. Actually this explanation of mine will be rather redundant, as it's already explained here (MediaWiki). Zuleika 08:04, 1 May 2011 (PDT)