Editing Talk:Hermes II
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision
Your text
Line 7:
Line 7: ::::::I like how there are references with endnote links that give the source of information for 'Mechs. I think we could improve these in two ways. First, a variant should not have a link that refers to source material that does not mention the specific variant as this is not helpful and wastes time for the person trying to find information on a variant (this is a very common occurrence). Secondly, there should be a standard way to report differences with printed materials. This might not seem important to some when the printed material is more than 20 years old, but even material from the last 5 years contain errors. There is no way for a user to know if the SARNA article contains a typo, or if the book or PDF they are looking at has a typo. If the SARNA article had an endnote link that said at the bottom of the page something like, "The XXXX for this variant was incorrectly listed as XX in the first and second printings of TRO XXXX", then the user would know that the SARNA article contains the correct information. If there is no current practice of something like this, we should agree on a best way to implement it from here on out.--[[User:recordsheet|recordsheet]] ::::::I like how there are references with endnote links that give the source of information for 'Mechs. I think we could improve these in two ways. First, a variant should not have a link that refers to source material that does not mention the specific variant as this is not helpful and wastes time for the person trying to find information on a variant (this is a very common occurrence). Secondly, there should be a standard way to report differences with printed materials. This might not seem important to some when the printed material is more than 20 years old, but even material from the last 5 years contain errors. There is no way for a user to know if the SARNA article contains a typo, or if the book or PDF they are looking at has a typo. If the SARNA article had an endnote link that said at the bottom of the page something like, "The XXXX for this variant was incorrectly listed as XX in the first and second printings of TRO XXXX", then the user would know that the SARNA article contains the correct information. If there is no current practice of something like this, we should agree on a best way to implement it from here on out.--[[User:recordsheet|recordsheet]] :::::::A lot of articles have a notes section that include things like known errors or contradictions in fluff etc. It is possible but more unusual for things like rules irregularities to be included. Seeking to note every mistake in the old products however is a huge task in of itself and likely way beyond the current Sarna team (there are only about a dozen of us who are regularly active), if we had 50 of us maybe.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 21:18, 21 March 2019 (EDT) :::::::A lot of articles have a notes section that include things like known errors or contradictions in fluff etc. It is possible but more unusual for things like rules irregularities to be included. Seeking to note every mistake in the old products however is a huge task in of itself and likely way beyond the current Sarna team (there are only about a dozen of us who are regularly active), if we had 50 of us maybe.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 21:18, 21 March 2019 (EDT) − ::::::::I do agree though that a note regarding the error and its correction is worth having. People shouldn't ''expect '' Sarna to be better than the original BT products, but we can try. :) [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 05:05, 22 March 2019 (EDT)
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
::::::I like how there are references with endnote links that give the source of information for 'Mechs. I think we could improve these in two ways. First, a variant should not have a link that refers to source material that does not mention the specific variant as this is not helpful and wastes time for the person trying to find information on a variant (this is a very common occurrence). Secondly, there should be a standard way to report differences with printed materials. This might not seem important to some when the printed material is more than 20 years old, but even material from the last 5 years contain errors. There is no way for a user to know if the SARNA article contains a typo, or if the book or PDF they are looking at has a typo. If the SARNA article had an endnote link that said at the bottom of the page something like, "The XXXX for this variant was incorrectly listed as XX in the first and second printings of TRO XXXX", then the user would know that the SARNA article contains the correct information. If there is no current practice of something like this, we should agree on a best way to implement it from here on out.--[[User:recordsheet|recordsheet]] | ::::::I like how there are references with endnote links that give the source of information for 'Mechs. I think we could improve these in two ways. First, a variant should not have a link that refers to source material that does not mention the specific variant as this is not helpful and wastes time for the person trying to find information on a variant (this is a very common occurrence). Secondly, there should be a standard way to report differences with printed materials. This might not seem important to some when the printed material is more than 20 years old, but even material from the last 5 years contain errors. There is no way for a user to know if the SARNA article contains a typo, or if the book or PDF they are looking at has a typo. If the SARNA article had an endnote link that said at the bottom of the page something like, "The XXXX for this variant was incorrectly listed as XX in the first and second printings of TRO XXXX", then the user would know that the SARNA article contains the correct information. If there is no current practice of something like this, we should agree on a best way to implement it from here on out.--[[User:recordsheet|recordsheet]] | ||
:::::::A lot of articles have a notes section that include things like known errors or contradictions in fluff etc. It is possible but more unusual for things like rules irregularities to be included. Seeking to note every mistake in the old products however is a huge task in of itself and likely way beyond the current Sarna team (there are only about a dozen of us who are regularly active), if we had 50 of us maybe.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 21:18, 21 March 2019 (EDT) | :::::::A lot of articles have a notes section that include things like known errors or contradictions in fluff etc. It is possible but more unusual for things like rules irregularities to be included. Seeking to note every mistake in the old products however is a huge task in of itself and likely way beyond the current Sarna team (there are only about a dozen of us who are regularly active), if we had 50 of us maybe.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 21:18, 21 March 2019 (EDT) | ||
| − | |||