Welcome to Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum! Log in and join the community.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Xenarite"
From Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:Also, given that the materials were added a long time ago (but - from the canon source) and we cann't check them, we 'believe' that they were really taken from the mentioned source. In short we can neither confirm nor deny their veracity. PROPOSAL: May be we must create the particular banner for such a materials, which will emphasize that information of the article is 'conditionally' acceptable?--[[User:Darkelf77|Darkelf77]] ([[User talk:Darkelf77|talk]]) 03:15, 21 November 2018 (MST) | :Also, given that the materials were added a long time ago (but - from the canon source) and we cann't check them, we 'believe' that they were really taken from the mentioned source. In short we can neither confirm nor deny their veracity. PROPOSAL: May be we must create the particular banner for such a materials, which will emphasize that information of the article is 'conditionally' acceptable?--[[User:Darkelf77|Darkelf77]] ([[User talk:Darkelf77|talk]]) 03:15, 21 November 2018 (MST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::@[[User talk:Darkelf77|talk]]: Unless I completely misunderstand you I do not see any need for a particular banner or to treat such sources as any different from other sources. Why should such a source be any different from let's say limited edition publications or for examle 1st edition books? Not that easy to find, sure. But existant and therefore perfectly verifiable. Why should we not be able to check them? As long as they existed at some point there is a chance that somebody of us has a copy. I think we have (or had and it is gone?) a list somewhere who had what (never complete of course). Presumably some kind of central "Source material request page" would be in order. Thoughts? --[[User:Inquisitor S.|Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum]] ([[User talk:Inquisitor S.|talk]]) 08:23, 21 November 2018 (MST) | ||
Revision as of 15:23, 21 November 2018
Link no longer functioning
The link here to Tezla on the specialist-games site is no longer functional. How do we proceed with the info on the page?TheNuclearSoldier (talk) 07:10, 20 November 2018 (MST)
- In such a situation we first check the Internet Archive (aka Wayback Machine) if it has a usable archived version of the page in question. Which here does not seem to be the case. Then I (or anybody else) check if one has a personal archive file (which is the case). But since this is a pdf-file and not hosted somewhere on the internet we cannot directly link there. And in any case I doubt it would be legal to host GW material on a private page. So we will treat it as any other document and just describe it as a non-link (until somebody creates an article for it - but for that we would have to actually think about the naming conventions). --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:21, 20 November 2018 (MST)
- ADDENDUM: If somebody from the staff needs the file for checking sources etc. it can of course be made available on a personal basis for research purposes (just not in a hurry and not publicly). --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 11:54, 20 November 2018 (MST)
- Also, given that the materials were added a long time ago (but - from the canon source) and we cann't check them, we 'believe' that they were really taken from the mentioned source. In short we can neither confirm nor deny their veracity. PROPOSAL: May be we must create the particular banner for such a materials, which will emphasize that information of the article is 'conditionally' acceptable?--Darkelf77 (talk) 03:15, 21 November 2018 (MST)
- @talk: Unless I completely misunderstand you I do not see any need for a particular banner or to treat such sources as any different from other sources. Why should such a source be any different from let's say limited edition publications or for examle 1st edition books? Not that easy to find, sure. But existant and therefore perfectly verifiable. Why should we not be able to check them? As long as they existed at some point there is a chance that somebody of us has a copy. I think we have (or had and it is gone?) a list somewhere who had what (never complete of course). Presumably some kind of central "Source material request page" would be in order. Thoughts? --Inquisitor S., Großmeister des Ordo Lexicanum (talk) 08:23, 21 November 2018 (MST)
