Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
38,094
edits
Tag: 2017 source edit |
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
::: [List of all things the entire series uses here] | ::: [List of all things the entire series uses here] | ||
::But I don't think such a thing is imperative, given the context. This entire discussion was more me defending my entire going on the record than actually insisting that such a thing happen, I consider this a molehill, not a mountain. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:38, 31 January 2021 (UTC) | ::But I don't think such a thing is imperative, given the context. This entire discussion was more me defending my entire going on the record than actually insisting that such a thing happen, I consider this a molehill, not a mountain. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:38, 31 January 2021 (UTC) | ||
::: In point of fact, @NateBumber, if you'll review [[Tardis:Valid sources]], you'll find that you're using the terminology slightly wrong; ''The Brenda and Effie Mysteries'' or ''Vienna'' are not in fact "invalid sources", but rather "not covered" — i.e., not sources of ''any'' kind, whether it be for {{tlx|invalid}} pages or not. | |||
::: But yeah, I think Najawin and youhave the right of it in terms of what the precedent/current practice is. And we're not about to list every ''Star Trek'' story, complete with authorship, at ''[[Star Trek]]'', so in the spirit of [[T:NPOV]], we shouldn't give better treatment to ''Brenda & Effie'' in this regard. | |||
::: Although also, yes, as [[User:Shambala108]] said before the Forums blew up, it's discourteous and largely counterproductive to assume (hostile) intent on the part of people who haven't stated any such, outside of a formal [[T:NPA]] complaint. Please refrain from that, Nate. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:41, 31 January 2021 (UTC) |