23,097
edits
Talk:Hardcastle: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Druconomy, biliography, and Cadogan
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
Joe | Joe | ||
::Hello Joe and others, I just saw the comments above. Sorry I did not reply sooner. I agree that it would be beneficial to have information better cited, much better! Some articles are cited, while others, | ::Hello Joe and others, I just saw the comments above. Sorry I did not reply sooner. I agree that it would be beneficial to have information better cited, much better! Some articles are cited, while others, way too many, are not. Sometimes by looking at the View History tab and comparing the different versions you can at least see what users have contributed the information. Sometimes the only record is the IP address of the computer the information was contributed from. Pipedia is still a work in progress, to be sure. This article in particular seems to generate a fair amount of questions. Here is an E-mail I received today from Andrew Serafin, for instance, which I will post here in case anyone can help with his questions : | ||
:::You introduced the products names of Hardcastele and its’ grouping: Pre-Cadogan Era and Seconds.Question #1: Could I know what is your source of info to follow my quest to know best? Question #2: Why you use the Pre-Cadogan as point of division? Neither Dunhill nor Hardcastele were in the Codogan group until I know. The story of Codogan group (until I know) is: | :::You introduced the products names of Hardcastele and its’ grouping: Pre-Cadogan Era and Seconds.Question #1: Could I know what is your source of info to follow my quest to know best? Question #2: Why you use the Pre-Cadogan as point of division? Neither Dunhill nor Hardcastele were in the Codogan group until I know. The story of Codogan group (until I know) is: | ||