Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ludwig De Braeckeleer"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(I've reversed your edit) |
(A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma...?) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:Trouble is, [[User:Robin|Robin]], you didn't read the referenced article [https://pt35b.wordpress.com/ "PT/35(b): A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”]. Had you done so, you'd have seen that the ''large chunk of material'' comes directly from [[Ludwig De Braeckeleer]]. I've reversed your edit.--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 14:25, 7 April 2015 (IST) | :Trouble is, [[User:Robin|Robin]], you didn't read the referenced article [https://pt35b.wordpress.com/ "PT/35(b): A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”]. Had you done so, you'd have seen that the ''large chunk of material'' comes directly from [[Ludwig De Braeckeleer]]. I've reversed your edit.--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 14:25, 7 April 2015 (IST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick]], PT/35(b) may be a "riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma", but that is no reason this page should also be. I thought it was so obvious as to go without saying that encyclopaedic style requires that '''pages are standalone items'''. I will ammend the style guide to make this explicit. In the meantime, I recommend you adjust the page so that it is ''clearly'' about [[Ludwig De Braeckeleer]]. [[User:Robin|Robin]] ([[User talk:Robin|talk]]) 14:39, 7 April 2015 (IST) | ||
Revision as of 13:39, 7 April 2015
Relevance
I've just removed a large chunk of material on this page, since it didn't appear to be about Ludwig De Braeckeleer, who should be the main subject of everything written on this page. See WikiSpooks:Style_Guide#Focus if you're in any doubt. Robin (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2015 (IST)
- Trouble is, Robin, you didn't read the referenced article "PT/35(b): A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”. Had you done so, you'd have seen that the large chunk of material comes directly from Ludwig De Braeckeleer. I've reversed your edit.--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2015 (IST)
- Patrick, PT/35(b) may be a "riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma", but that is no reason this page should also be. I thought it was so obvious as to go without saying that encyclopaedic style requires that pages are standalone items. I will ammend the style guide to make this explicit. In the meantime, I recommend you adjust the page so that it is clearly about Ludwig De Braeckeleer. Robin (talk) 14:39, 7 April 2015 (IST)
