Talk:Stravenue: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Hayford Peirce (→Referential loops: the CZ article existed first -- the newspaper is quoting from it. this ought to be permissible to point out) |
imported>J. Noel Chiappa (→Referential loops: No worries) |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
[http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Stravenue&curid=100047779&diff=100287088&oldid=100278678 ''added info from a Tucson newspaper about stravenues -- the article mentions CZ as a source''] - aiee, feedback loop! :-) [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 14:03, 14 March 2008 (CDT) | [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Stravenue&curid=100047779&diff=100287088&oldid=100278678 ''added info from a Tucson newspaper about stravenues -- the article mentions CZ as a source''] - aiee, feedback loop! :-) [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 14:03, 14 March 2008 (CDT) | ||
:Well, I *mean* that the newspaper article says that it used CZ as a source for some of its info. The CZ article (written by me) was in existence before the newspaper article. I think it's permissible to mention this in *our* article, but maybe it isn't clear the way it stand now. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 14:24, 14 March 2008 (CDT) | :Well, I *mean* that the newspaper article says that it used CZ as a source for some of its info. The CZ article (written by me) was in existence before the newspaper article. I think it's permissible to mention this in *our* article, but maybe it isn't clear the way it stand now. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 14:24, 14 March 2008 (CDT) | ||
:: No worries, I was just being silly. [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 14:42, 14 March 2008 (CDT) |
Revision as of 13:42, 14 March 2008
Referential loops
added info from a Tucson newspaper about stravenues -- the article mentions CZ as a source - aiee, feedback loop! :-) J. Noel Chiappa 14:03, 14 March 2008 (CDT)
- Well, I *mean* that the newspaper article says that it used CZ as a source for some of its info. The CZ article (written by me) was in existence before the newspaper article. I think it's permissible to mention this in *our* article, but maybe it isn't clear the way it stand now. Hayford Peirce 14:24, 14 March 2008 (CDT)
- No worries, I was just being silly. J. Noel Chiappa 14:42, 14 March 2008 (CDT)