Talk:Historic theaters of California: Difference between revisions
imported>Robert W King (→historic significance: new section) |
imported>Subpagination Bot m (Add {{subpages}} and remove checklist (details)) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
}} | |||
== move == | == move == |
Latest revision as of 12:54, 3 November 2007
|
Metadata here |
move
Perhaps this article would be better placed at California, Historic theaters or something similar. Most of our other articles seem to follow that format. --Todd Coles 15:53, 3 August 2007 (CDT)
Actually, a catalog of California theaters would belong on California theater/Catalogs/Historic theaters. Since we have instigated CZ:Subpages officially, catalogs should appear only on subpages. --Larry Sanger 10:03, 18 September 2007 (CDT)
Also, I disagree with Todd's point about the use of the comma in this sort of case. History editor Richard Jensen uses commas in history articles; but before too much longer we'll be taking a Council vote on this (actually, a question we might vote on first is whether the History Workgroup can set its own policy on such issues). --Larry Sanger 10:06, 18 September 2007 (CDT)
historic significance
Could you make a case that these theatres had a historic significance in the development of Cali's hollywood dominance, and certainly a major contributing factor to their demographics since its inception.. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss history as a category. --Robert W King 01:37, 8 October 2007 (CDT)
- Developing Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Visual Arts Developing Articles
- Visual Arts Nonstub Articles
- Visual Arts Internal Articles
- History Developing Articles
- History Nonstub Articles
- History Internal Articles
- Visual Arts Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- History Underlinked Articles
- Need def
- Visual Arts need def
- History need def
- Need bib
- Visual Arts need bib
- History need bib
- History tag