Difference between revisions of "Talk:Advance-3"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(That refrence that is linked to)
 
(Fixing link to wrong page)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== That refrence that is linked to ==
 
== That refrence that is linked to ==
  
−
Consistently, these ship reports have been linked to an index page rather than the paticular page for the ship - http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3-list.htm rather than http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3/advance-iii.htm .  In this case for the ship, it was linked to the ''wrong'' index page http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3-list.htm .  For future pages, please link to the ship itself rather than the index page.  It is rather embarrassing to have a link to a reference that doesn't show anything about the boat in question.  Thank you.  --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 14:18, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
+
Consistently, these ship reports have been linked to an index page rather than the paticular page for the ship - http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3-list.htm rather than http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3/advance-iii.htm .  In this case for the ship, it was linked to the ''wrong'' index page http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a2-list.htm .  For future pages, please link to the ship itself rather than the index page.  It is rather embarrassing to have a link to a reference that doesn't show anything about the boat in question.  Thank you.  --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 14:18, 11 July 2007 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 18:19, July 11, 2007

That refrence that is linked to

Consistently, these ship reports have been linked to an index page rather than the paticular page for the ship - http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3-list.htm rather than http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a3/advance-iii.htm . In this case for the ship, it was linked to the wrong index page http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/a2-list.htm . For future pages, please link to the ship itself rather than the index page. It is rather embarrassing to have a link to a reference that doesn't show anything about the boat in question. Thank you. --Mtur 14:18, 11 July 2007 (EDT)