Talk:Civil society/Catalogs/Researchers and theorists: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger (New page: Just to be clear, ''this'' and similarly formatted catalog should probably be a section of Civil society/Related Articles. If it merely lists topics and definitions. As such, it's no...) |
imported>Chris Day No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Just to be clear, ''this'' and similarly formatted catalog should probably be a section of [[Civil society/Related Articles]]. If it merely lists topics and definitions. As such, it's not a catalog, it is simply a glossary, and glossaries are to be placed under "Related Articles." (Yes, ugh. :-) ) --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 09:12, 18 October 2007 (CDT) | Just to be clear, ''this'' and similarly formatted catalog should probably be a section of [[Civil society/Related Articles]]. If it merely lists topics and definitions. As such, it's not a catalog, it is simply a glossary, and glossaries are to be placed under "Related Articles." (Yes, ugh. :-) ) --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 09:12, 18 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
:I think the reason it is using that format is because it started on related pages. There is no reason why this could not grow into a nice catalog. In fact I am going to be gold and strip out the r template since it does not really work in the catalog format. | |||
Revision as of 09:02, 18 October 2007
Just to be clear, this and similarly formatted catalog should probably be a section of Civil society/Related Articles. If it merely lists topics and definitions. As such, it's not a catalog, it is simply a glossary, and glossaries are to be placed under "Related Articles." (Yes, ugh. :-) ) --Larry Sanger 09:12, 18 October 2007 (CDT)
- I think the reason it is using that format is because it started on related pages. There is no reason why this could not grow into a nice catalog. In fact I am going to be gold and strip out the r template since it does not really work in the catalog format.