Talk:Bromide paper
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
I'm thinking of cleaning up this page. Promide - can anyone reference this? I Googled and very little appeared in English apart from this article and a Japanese dictionary. In any case, is a Japanese product relevant to the subject of photographic papers on an English encyclopedia? Comments? Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd planned to put this article up for deletion - however, if nobody comments within a month I'll 'be bold' and set up a redirect to Photographic paper which i'm currently cleaning up. The Japanese culture info or video game stuff doesn't belong here IMO, and there's not enough original content to justify keeping it. If anyone objects to this, please post. Ta muchly. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, the Japanese culture material really ought to be in its own article. And a redirect makes perfect sense for the little that is left.
- On the other hand, allusions to bromide paper appear in several articles, e.g. Paper print, Imagesetter#Output on bromide paper, Bromoil Process, Cabinet card, Manly Daily, Joseph Swan, Leon Warnerke. These references suggest that that there is some potential for expansion, even if such "expansion" were merely a copy of various snippets (for example, the second para is a copy of text in the Joseph Swan article). There are also some neat things being done with bromide paper that could be referred to.
- Your call. :) -- Fullstop (talk) 14:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments, sorry I didn't reply earlier. I'm going to split this, and will try and incorporate the content into the history section of photographic paper, with this page redirected there. I'd like to see the photographic pages better organised; this would be a start. I said I'd give it a month, but since no-one else has commented, I'm guessing there's no interest in keeping this page as it is.Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think there is any interest either, so ... I've just gone ahead and redirected. -- Fullstop (talk) 12:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks :-) Baffle gab1978 (talk) 07:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC)