Difference between revisions of "User talk:Anniemod"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Hi, as the help for entering the date of publications explicitly says to use the publication date stated within a book [''For books, to identify the publication date, try to find a statement (often on the verso of the title page) that says something like "Published in June 2001"''], it seems that the date should be changed to 2016-05-00, for your verified publication. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:36, 12 January 2022 (EST) | Hi, as the help for entering the date of publications explicitly says to use the publication date stated within a book [''For books, to identify the publication date, try to find a statement (often on the verso of the title page) that says something like "Published in June 2001"''], it seems that the date should be changed to 2016-05-00, for your verified publication. Christian [[User:Stonecreek|Stonecreek]] 13:36, 12 January 2022 (EST) | ||
| − | : No - that date is correct. The book stays as it is. Thanks. If you would like to argue this, please open a discussion about not allowing secondary sources to date books. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 13:41, 12 January 2022 (EST) | + | : No - that date is correct and has a valid secondary source. The book stays as it is. Thanks. If you would like to argue this, please open a discussion about not allowing secondary sources to date books. [[User:Anniemod|Annie]] 13:41, 12 January 2022 (EST) |
Revision as of 14:53, 12 January 2022
Archives
Archive1, Archive2, Archive3, 2018-part2, 2019-2020, 2021
Company Town
Hi, as the help for entering the date of publications explicitly says to use the publication date stated within a book [For books, to identify the publication date, try to find a statement (often on the verso of the title page) that says something like "Published in June 2001"], it seems that the date should be changed to 2016-05-00, for your verified publication. Christian Stonecreek 13:36, 12 January 2022 (EST)
- No - that date is correct and has a valid secondary source. The book stays as it is. Thanks. If you would like to argue this, please open a discussion about not allowing secondary sources to date books. Annie 13:41, 12 January 2022 (EST)