User talk:Sethile: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: As per my other suggestion, perhaps it would be better to completely remove the Marks/Logo page altogether and just have a link at the bottom of each Brand/Maker's page to the Pipephil web...) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
As per my other suggestion, perhaps it would be better to completely remove the Marks/Logo page altogether and just have a link at the bottom of each Brand/Maker's page to the Pipephil website for that particular Brand or Maker? --[[User:Frank|Frank]] - 3/26/09 | As per my other suggestion, perhaps it would be better to completely remove the Marks/Logo page altogether and just have a link at the bottom of each Brand/Maker's page to the Pipephil website for that particular Brand or Maker? --[[User:Frank|Frank]] - 3/26/09 | ||
: Sure, that would work fine too. 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]] 15:41, 26 March 2009 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 20:41, 26 March 2009
As per my other suggestion, perhaps it would be better to completely remove the Marks/Logo page altogether and just have a link at the bottom of each Brand/Maker's page to the Pipephil website for that particular Brand or Maker? --Frank - 3/26/09
- Sure, that would work fine too. 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. --sethile 15:41, 26 March 2009 (CDT)