Talk:Ébauche: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Watches}}, {{WikiProject Time}}. Tag: |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|listas=Ebauche| |
||
{{WikiProject Watches}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Time |
{{WikiProject Time|importance=low}} |
||
}} |
|||
==Untitled== |
==Untitled== |
||
Here's an excellent example of how breaking down natural categories results in meaningless fragments, or ''ebauches'' in the more general sense. Why has this been relieved of its context? [[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 21:32, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC) |
Here's an excellent example of how breaking down natural categories results in meaningless fragments, or ''ebauches'' in the more general sense. Why has this been relieved of its context? [[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 21:32, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC) |
||
| ⚫ | I respect your opinion that it seems meaningless to people only superficially interested in watches. However, what prompted me to take my time and try and make a breakdown of the watch terminology are the frequent questions I am being regularly asked about watches, its history: lots of time it is very difficult for people to understand, without a proper grasp of the terminology. Best regard. Claude Girardin |
||
== Split to new articles == |
|||
| ⚫ | I respect your opinion that it seems meaningless to people only superficially interested in watches. However, what prompted me to take my time and try and make a breakdown of the watch terminology are the frequent questions I am being regularly asked about watches, its history: lots of time it is very difficult for people to understand, without a proper grasp of the terminology. Best regard. Claude Girardin |
||
These other elements would make very small stub articles, and would reduce this main article significantly as well. Since there has been no discussion on the talk pages regarding this proposed split, I am removing the tag from the article page. However, feel free to discuss and re-add as necessary. Thanks. [[User:Tiggerjay|Tiggerjay]] ([[User talk:Tiggerjay|talk]]) 06:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 06:37, 1 February 2024
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Here's an excellent example of how breaking down natural categories results in meaningless fragments, or ebauches in the more general sense. Why has this been relieved of its context? Wetman 21:32, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I respect your opinion that it seems meaningless to people only superficially interested in watches. However, what prompted me to take my time and try and make a breakdown of the watch terminology are the frequent questions I am being regularly asked about watches, its history: lots of time it is very difficult for people to understand, without a proper grasp of the terminology. Best regard. Claude Girardin
Split to new articles
[edit]These other elements would make very small stub articles, and would reduce this main article significantly as well. Since there has been no discussion on the talk pages regarding this proposed split, I am removing the tag from the article page. However, feel free to discuss and re-add as necessary. Thanks. Tiggerjay (talk) 06:22, 25 May 2011 (UTC)