23,097
edits
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Could it be generalized? | Could it be generalized? | ||
Reply to Pipephil on the above matter: | |||
I hadn't checked on the Pipes Marks & Logos page in awhile, so I hadn't noticed the changes until now. There used to be a link there to your Pipephil website, plus a couple of links to other Pipe Logo sites, but they somehow got removed. I will replace the link to Pipephil on that page. I will ask Scott (Site Administrator) to put a link to the Pipe Marks & Logos page in the Navigation Bar and also ask him what would be the best way to resolve this. | I hadn't checked on the Pipes Marks & Logos page in awhile, so I hadn't noticed the changes until now. There used to be a link there to your Pipephil website, plus a couple of links to other Pipe Logo sites, but they somehow got removed. I will replace the link to Pipephil on that page. I will ask Scott (Site Administrator) to put a link to the Pipe Marks & Logos page in the Navigation Bar and also ask him what would be the best way to resolve this. | ||
Line 16: | Line 19: | ||
It is still possible to create a Pipedia Page for any pipe brand/name and place a link from that page to Pipephil, even if the Logo at Pipephil is the only information available for that pipe. | It is still possible to create a Pipedia Page for any pipe brand/name and place a link from that page to Pipephil, even if the Logo at Pipephil is the only information available for that pipe. | ||
Pipedia itself is only a couple of years old and is still a work in progress. There are still numerous Brands and Makers lacking information, so any contributions are greatly welcomed. I will refer this matter to Scott to get his feedback, since he is the person that initiated Pipedia. | Pipedia itself is only a couple of years old and is still a work in progress. There are still numerous Brands and Makers lacking information, so any contributions are greatly welcomed. I will refer this matter to Scott to get his feedback, since he is the person that initiated Pipedia. Frank - 3/26/09 | ||
:Thanks for all your help Pipephil! As Frank suggested I've added the Marks/Logos link to the sidebar navigation. I like Frank's idea of adding a Pipedia Page for any pipe brand/name you want to link to, then place a link from that page to Pipephil. That will also provide a ready place on Pipedia for additional information. --[[User:Sethile|sethile]] 14:02, 26 March 2009 (CDT) | |||
:The advantage of the Marks/Logo page, assuming it were to get flushed out eventually, is for situations where someone is trying to identify a pipe with some sort of logo without knowing the maker. Regardless, I think relevant off site links should be added at the bottom of each article directly. --[[User:Sethile|sethile]] 15:42, 26 March 2009 (CDT) |