User:Cobalt327
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Now when you say to make "Quadrajet carburetors" a category, would that be like "Engine" or "Transmission"? Let me know if I've misunderstood this. | Now when you say to make "Quadrajet carburetors" a category, would that be like "Engine" or "Transmission"? Let me know if I've misunderstood this. | ||
:::Yes, that's correct, make it a category like "Engine" or "Transmission". Agreed on avoiding a huge unwieldy page. One strategy is to do a "Master Article" that links out to the sub-articles. For example, check out [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy the Wikipedia article on "Energy"]. Many of the article sections have headers like: "Main article: Conservation of Energy", etc., that lead the reader to other full articles.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 14:33, 8 February 2012 (MST) | :::Yes, that's correct, make it a category like "Engine" or "Transmission". Agreed on avoiding a huge unwieldy page. One strategy is to do a "Master Article" that links out to the sub-articles. For example, check out [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy the Wikipedia article on "Energy"]. Many of the article sections have headers like: "Main article: Conservation of Energy", etc., that lead the reader to other full articles.--[[User:Jon|Jon]] 14:33, 8 February 2012 (MST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::Hello Jon and cobalt. Thank you for inviting me to this discussion. As cobalt mentioned, he has been in touch with me and we have talked about the various ways of taking many articles on similar subjects and merge them into a few detailed articles. I did take a thorough look at the ''"Energy"'' article you linked. If I understand correctly, you wish to see one master article that that branches out to several main articles, all on one page. Is that correct? | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::I believe the best approach is to have a master article on one page that covers every related topic in a general manner, and to have the specifics covered on other pages and linked to the master article. From my perspective, both as a user and an editor, few inter-related articles are not as overwhelming as an all-in-one. Chances are that if someone is looking for procedures on something, he or she is not going to want to skim through everything else first. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::For example, sticking with the Quadrajet, the page titled ''"Quadrajet"'' can cover every thing related to the carburetor in a general sense: history, variations, applications, pros and cons, significance, etc. More specific sub-topics that require detailed explanations can be given their own pages: how to rebuild specific versions (2bbl, 4bbl), identification, tuning. Also, anything that can be covered in a general sense should be spared a specific page. For example, if someone decides to do a page on cleaning carburetors, there is no need to cover it again in any other page. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::I look forward to reading any thoughts you guys may have. - --[[User:LT1Silverhawk|LT1Silverhawk]] 20:17, 9 February 2012 (MST) | ||
Jon, pls. see [http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Talk:Transmission_holding_fixtures Discussion] when you get a minute. I do not care about "being right", I'd rather keep this from turning unnecessarily adversarial. For the better good of the Crankshaft Coalition Wiki project I will defer to whatever you decide. Not looking for drama- just accuracy.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 18:59, 9 February 2012 (MST) | Jon, pls. see [http://www.crankshaftcoalition.com/wiki/Talk:Transmission_holding_fixtures Discussion] when you get a minute. I do not care about "being right", I'd rather keep this from turning unnecessarily adversarial. For the better good of the Crankshaft Coalition Wiki project I will defer to whatever you decide. Not looking for drama- just accuracy.--[[User:Cobalt327|Cobalt327]] 18:59, 9 February 2012 (MST) | ||
Your Privacy Choices