Talk:Mr Hong: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Old Dickens (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Old Dickens (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
It's a rotten shame we couldn't save the history. When I wrote Three Jolly Luck I didn't think Mr Hong needed a separate article since that was all we knew about him. Someone (lost in the history) just copied a chunk of the original over here; I think the mentioned rewrite was done sometime since 2009. How does putting more of it in here differentiate them? --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens|talk]]) 15:01, 19 October 2013 (GMT) | It's a rotten shame we couldn't save the history. When I wrote Three Jolly Luck I didn't think Mr Hong needed a separate article since that was all we knew about him. Someone (lost in the history) just copied a chunk of the original over here; I think the mentioned rewrite was done sometime since 2009. How does putting more of it in here differentiate them? --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens|talk]]) 15:01, 19 October 2013 (GMT) | ||
:Yes, shame on that. My idea was also half-baked; perhaps the best would be to put all information on one of the two pages and redirect from the other... But I don't know how many links to Mr Hong exist side-by-side by links to Three Jolly Luck - and what can be done about that?--[[User:EinFritz|EinFritz]] ([[User talk:EinFritz|talk]]) 15:22, 19 October 2013 (GMT) | |||
''Si non confectus, non reficiat'', I always say. It doesn't seem like much of a problem. --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens|talk]]) 15:35, 19 October 2013 (GMT) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:35, 19 October 2013
A complete rewrite might be in order here, rather than just copying the section of Three Jolly Luck, but creating a sentence fragment doesn't seem to help. --Old Dickens 21:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- I've done my best, for what it's worth. But the problem remains that Mr. Hong and his fish bar appear only in unison. As far as I see it, to differentiate the articles a little, we should put all new details on the Three Jolly Luck site and all references to the books on this page.--EinFritz (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2013 (GMT)
It's a rotten shame we couldn't save the history. When I wrote Three Jolly Luck I didn't think Mr Hong needed a separate article since that was all we knew about him. Someone (lost in the history) just copied a chunk of the original over here; I think the mentioned rewrite was done sometime since 2009. How does putting more of it in here differentiate them? --Old Dickens (talk) 15:01, 19 October 2013 (GMT)
- Yes, shame on that. My idea was also half-baked; perhaps the best would be to put all information on one of the two pages and redirect from the other... But I don't know how many links to Mr Hong exist side-by-side by links to Three Jolly Luck - and what can be done about that?--EinFritz (talk) 15:22, 19 October 2013 (GMT)
Si non confectus, non reficiat, I always say. It doesn't seem like much of a problem. --Old Dickens (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2013 (GMT)