User:McG: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
[[User:Vangemeren|Jack]] 23:42, 22 May 2006 (EDT) | [[User:Vangemeren|Jack]] 23:42, 22 May 2006 (EDT) | ||
I always anticipated linking the units to the existing regiment pages (don't know if I will get the time though). It would certainly make a shorter list to move addresses into the Regt page. | |||
I always anticipated linking the units to the existing regiment pages (don't know if I will get the time though). It would certainly make a shorter list to move addresses into the Regt page. | |||
http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Army_Reserve_Units_%28by_Location%29#St._Thomas |
Revision as of 23:51, 22 May 2006
I was thinking, with the unit list, changing the format to this:
Saskatchewan
Regina
18 F Bty 10th Field Artillery Regiment RCA
The Royal Regina Rifles
16 (Saskatchewan) Service Battalion
16 Field Ambulance (Regina & Saskatoon)
Then having the addresses on the unit pages themselves, that way the unit page won't be so long. We then make a whole bunch of "stubs" by making pages for the Svc Bns (and other unit types) with their addresses, even if there is nothing else. That way when people come accross it they can add themselves. I find it easier to add to something than create something new. I would like to know what you think. I have lots of time as my job hasn't started yet, so I can make the changes.
Jack 23:42, 22 May 2006 (EDT)
I always anticipated linking the units to the existing regiment pages (don't know if I will get the time though). It would certainly make a shorter list to move addresses into the Regt page. http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Army_Reserve_Units_%28by_Location%29#St._Thomas