Difference between revisions of "Talk:Easton's Bible Dictionary"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
I think it makes perfect sense to change the name since the idea was to develop a free wiki bible dictionary. Since we do not want to reinvent the wheel, we would like to use what ever is already in the public domain. EBD is one of the Bible Dictionaries in the PD but there are others also. We will change the name to WikiChristian's [[Free Bible Dictionary]] or in short FBD. Thanks for the excellent point. We need to think ahead while naming our projects, like in this situation, so that, when the wiki evolves, it does not have to change the name. [[User:Prab|Prab]] 6:45 PM, 11 Mar 2005 (EST) | I think it makes perfect sense to change the name since the idea was to develop a free wiki bible dictionary. Since we do not want to reinvent the wheel, we would like to use what ever is already in the public domain. EBD is one of the Bible Dictionaries in the PD but there are others also. We will change the name to WikiChristian's [[Free Bible Dictionary]] or in short FBD. Thanks for the excellent point. We need to think ahead while naming our projects, like in this situation, so that, when the wiki evolves, it does not have to change the name. [[User:Prab|Prab]] 6:45 PM, 11 Mar 2005 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Prab, I think this makes sense. I looked through the recent changes and I was like..."wow." Thanks for saving me the trouble of moving most of the stuff! One last question....do we want the FBD pages to link to the main article (ie, "Abraham") or do we want them to link to the FBD page (ie "Free_Bible_Dictionary:Abraham") I know that in some cases we have a great number of articles written about someone (take Peter for instance. The "Peter" article links to Graham's article on the papacy, a short biography of Peter, and eventually it will also link to the FBD article on Peter. So, in my thinking we'll want the FBD index pages to just link directly to the FBD article and save users an extra click...but what does everyone else think? [[User:Cpark|Cpark]] 07:00, 12 Mar 2005 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 15:00, 12 March 2005
I was just thinking about something. If we call this Easton's Bible Dictionary...that's okay. But as we review and edit and add to it (you know, do those things that make a wiki a wiki) it will eventually be quite different from the original EBD. Maybe we should change the name to "WikiChristian's Bible Dictionary" and just say that it is BASED on the EBD. That way a year or two down the road, when we've edited things with it...we are still acurrate in the name. What does everyone think? Also, by linking to the external EBD we still give people a chance to see the original text of the EBD. Cpark 08:39, 11 Mar 2005 (PST)
Hi Cpark,
I think it makes perfect sense to change the name since the idea was to develop a free wiki bible dictionary. Since we do not want to reinvent the wheel, we would like to use what ever is already in the public domain. EBD is one of the Bible Dictionaries in the PD but there are others also. We will change the name to WikiChristian's Free Bible Dictionary or in short FBD. Thanks for the excellent point. We need to think ahead while naming our projects, like in this situation, so that, when the wiki evolves, it does not have to change the name. Prab 6:45 PM, 11 Mar 2005 (EST)
Prab, I think this makes sense. I looked through the recent changes and I was like..."wow." Thanks for saving me the trouble of moving most of the stuff! One last question....do we want the FBD pages to link to the main article (ie, "Abraham") or do we want them to link to the FBD page (ie "Free_Bible_Dictionary:Abraham") I know that in some cases we have a great number of articles written about someone (take Peter for instance. The "Peter" article links to Graham's article on the papacy, a short biography of Peter, and eventually it will also link to the FBD article on Peter. So, in my thinking we'll want the FBD index pages to just link directly to the FBD article and save users an extra click...but what does everyone else think? Cpark 07:00, 12 Mar 2005 (PST)
