Special:Badtitle/NS90:GHN talk:About STARS/STARS articles cannot be safely referenced from other papers, books.: Difference between revisions
From ETHW
(New thread: STARS articles cannot be safely referenced from other papers, books.) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
While "these articles are meant to provide authoritative information, valuable in itself, but also useful as starting points for further investigations" may be true, the articles are not dated. Thus referenced detail can simply vanish as if it had never existed. | While "these articles are meant to provide authoritative information, valuable in itself, but also useful as starting points for further investigations" may be true, the articles are subject to revision but not dated. Thus referenced detail can simply vanish as if it had never existed. | ||
STARS articles should be dated. Initially the date first posted, later the date of last revision. | STARS articles should be dated. Initially the date first posted, later the date of last revision. | ||
Rw | Rw | ||
Revision as of 05:29, 6 April 2013
While "these articles are meant to provide authoritative information, valuable in itself, but also useful as starting points for further investigations" may be true, the articles are subject to revision but not dated. Thus referenced detail can simply vanish as if it had never existed.
STARS articles should be dated. Initially the date first posted, later the date of last revision.
Rw
