Talk:Armour: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
PS | PS | ||
I'll get the hang of this yet. I would like to figure out a "Back to Top" for those extremely long pages that you can't get away from at times. | I'll get the hang of this yet. I would like to figure out a "Back to Top" for those extremely long pages that you can't get away from at times. Do I have to add the time myself? It is 232004 May 2006 |
Revision as of 20:05, 23 May 2006
Do we need a standard template for the Arms pages? The Infantry and Engineer pages include the list of units on the main page; the Armd corps has a distinct "Regiments" page.
Information is easier to find if we apply a common template.
Any thoughts? DAPaterson 11:56, 23 May 2006 (EDT)
- George has been resisting a move to a common template; I agree with you but for now it looks like the Armour stuff is "doing its own thing."Michael Dorosh 14:16, 23 May 2006 (EDT)
Thanks Michael
I found that there was too much info on the first page, so to shorten it I moved it out. Someone else had started it, and it was rather cluttered. I cleaned it up, but have added other options/links such as Camp Flags. I was also thinking of doing the Cap badges.
Michael
As you are more familiar with this program, could you link the Camp Flags and then the Cap Badges into Categories as they develop? I was trying to keep them by Corps for now, but I imagine a master list may also come in handy.
Thanks
George
PS
I'll get the hang of this yet. I would like to figure out a "Back to Top" for those extremely long pages that you can't get away from at times. Do I have to add the time myself? It is 232004 May 2006