Difference between revisions of "Talk:BATE"
Fred Morlan (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I would think that the only reason for two separate articles would be the idea that at some point they would both have substantive information. If you think that at some point in the reasonably near future that there will be significant information on the old version on this wiki, then this probably should be two pages. If not, then I don't think it's a problem to just have the old version basically be a footnote to the new version, like it is now. [[User:David Reinstein|David Reinstein]] 14:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC) | I would think that the only reason for two separate articles would be the idea that at some point they would both have substantive information. If you think that at some point in the reasonably near future that there will be significant information on the old version on this wiki, then this probably should be two pages. If not, then I don't think it's a problem to just have the old version basically be a footnote to the new version, like it is now. [[User:David Reinstein|David Reinstein]] 14:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I actually give this further thought, and think it might be best if we split it into two pages: one for discussion of the Bloomfield tournament commonly known as "BATE" and one for the tournament set called "BATE" that kind of spawned from the tournament. Does that sound better?--[[User:Fred Morlan|Fred Morlan]] 20:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | makes sense to me [[User:David Reinstein|David Reinstein]] 21:48, 12 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Eh, why bother? --[[User:Matt Jackson|Matt Jackson]] 18:59, 12 July 2011 (do i have to add this ID myself) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Because they really are two separate subjects, and the second BATE set wasn't even used at that year's BATE tournament. Also, bothering would take about 3 minutes. --[[User:Fred Morlan|Fred Morlan]] 23:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 17:03, 12 July 2011
This would probably be best served by splitting it into pages about the new version (with updated info, of course) and info on the old, "Jeopardy" version. Thoughts? --Fred Morlan 03:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Additional info: old style BATE [1]. Newer versions, in chronological order: 2009, 2010, 2011.
I would think that the only reason for two separate articles would be the idea that at some point they would both have substantive information. If you think that at some point in the reasonably near future that there will be significant information on the old version on this wiki, then this probably should be two pages. If not, then I don't think it's a problem to just have the old version basically be a footnote to the new version, like it is now. David Reinstein 14:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
I actually give this further thought, and think it might be best if we split it into two pages: one for discussion of the Bloomfield tournament commonly known as "BATE" and one for the tournament set called "BATE" that kind of spawned from the tournament. Does that sound better?--Fred Morlan 20:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
makes sense to me David Reinstein 21:48, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Eh, why bother? --Matt Jackson 18:59, 12 July 2011 (do i have to add this ID myself)
Because they really are two separate subjects, and the second BATE set wasn't even used at that year's BATE tournament. Also, bothering would take about 3 minutes. --Fred Morlan 23:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)