User:Karl Dickman/Threads/06/12/23b
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Multi-line sequences
Note: this comment is part of a synchronised thread. You can reply by clicking the [edit] link next to the comment's heading, or following this link. To ensure that you can see any further responses I make, add this page to your watchlist. Once you have replied, feel free to remove this boilerplate.
You mentioned a discussion that has occurred on this subject. I've been looking over the WP:AIR page content talkpage, but I couldn't find anything that discussed it. Nor does the discussion seem to have occurred on WT:AIR. Would you be so kind as to send me a link?
Cheers and good luck, Karl Dickman talk 21:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- I remember having seen such discussions when I first started on Wiki in Aug/Sept of this year. I'll see what I can find. I posted a comment on the main WP:AIR talk page, so we should get some replies soon. If we don't get any, I'll back off the issue. - BillCJ 21:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Despite agreeing to back off, I think that I should briefly explain why I consider multi-line sequences useful. In general, they should be used where a designation sequence 'forks'. A classic example is the end of the bomber sequence: after B-68, the bomber sequence and missile sequence were split apart. Another example is the Boeing 345, a designation that refers to four different slots in the bomber sequence, two of which (the B-29 and B-50) are very important aircraft.
Fortunately, the use of {{split sequence}} should make adding such sequences far more intuitive for editors; previously, I had to code tables using HTML, which is bound to be immensely confusing to new editors. Cheers, Karl Dickman talk 22:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
