User talk:Archlich631: Difference between revisions
>LegacymtgsalvationUser8147 No edit summary |
>Archlich631@legacy41915729 No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Hi and thanks for your help! You asked about prerevisionist sources few times, so I thought I'd explain. There are two policies concerning it. First says that any place/person/event/other thing that appeared or was mentioned in any form in pre-rev sources (so its concept was created before [[revision]] started) has [[:Category:Prerevisionist]]. Second rule is that all pre-rev info is canon unless revisionist sources contradict them. Sure, you're right that it should be clearly marked where is revisionist part and where pre-rev one. Although, so far articles with mixed pre-rev/rev are rather rare or saying about different time periods - so there is no real problem. Anyway, creating more clear distinction between pre-rev and rev info in articles is a matter of (hopefully, near) future. --<b><span style="color:red">[[User:MORT|<sup><sup>M</sup></sup><sup>O</sup>R<sub>T</sub>]]</span></b> <sup><b>[[User talk: MORT|(T)]]</b></sup> 21:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC) | Hi and thanks for your help! You asked about prerevisionist sources few times, so I thought I'd explain. There are two policies concerning it. First says that any place/person/event/other thing that appeared or was mentioned in any form in pre-rev sources (so its concept was created before [[revision]] started) has [[:Category:Prerevisionist]]. Second rule is that all pre-rev info is canon unless revisionist sources contradict them. Sure, you're right that it should be clearly marked where is revisionist part and where pre-rev one. Although, so far articles with mixed pre-rev/rev are rather rare or saying about different time periods - so there is no real problem. Anyway, creating more clear distinction between pre-rev and rev info in articles is a matter of (hopefully, near) future. --<b><span style="color:red">[[User:MORT|<sup><sup>M</sup></sup><sup>O</sup>R<sub>T</sub>]]</span></b> <sup><b>[[User talk: MORT|(T)]]</b></sup> 21:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
Ok, I'm new to this site, so hopefully I'm doing everything correctly. | |||
Thanks for the information. | |||
Revision as of 03:29, 6 July 2007
Hi and thanks for your help! You asked about prerevisionist sources few times, so I thought I'd explain. There are two policies concerning it. First says that any place/person/event/other thing that appeared or was mentioned in any form in pre-rev sources (so its concept was created before revision started) has Category:Prerevisionist. Second rule is that all pre-rev info is canon unless revisionist sources contradict them. Sure, you're right that it should be clearly marked where is revisionist part and where pre-rev one. Although, so far articles with mixed pre-rev/rev are rather rare or saying about different time periods - so there is no real problem. Anyway, creating more clear distinction between pre-rev and rev info in articles is a matter of (hopefully, near) future. --MORT (T) 21:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I'm new to this site, so hopefully I'm doing everything correctly.
Thanks for the information.