Difference between revisions of "User talk:Ixoekea"

Revision as of 01:34, 17 November 2016

Pathfinder Manuals

The Pathfinder Story - Pathfinder Story Book

Church Heritage Manual - Heritage Manual

Years Honors Introduced

Hi, Ixoekea, I noticed you were able to add the years of introduction to many of the honors that were missing them. Do you mind sharing where you found the information? I've been trying to find that info for a long time! Thanks! --w126jep (talk) 22:37, 13 November 2016 (UTC)'

//Hi w126jep I found them under Plusline\(Honor Search) on Adventsource. Here is an example of : Aboriginal Lore Bottom Left corner of document says 2001.
I think there may be a discrepancy for Triathlon(Advanced) AdventSource says 2001. This website says 1956. I looked in our Recreation honour hard copy 6th edition from 1998 and Triathlon is not located in the honour book.
I also sent an inquire to the Australia Division on the skill level and the years of the missing information on the Australia honours such as [Australian Birds and Land and Freshwater Mollusks] that are missing that information. We actually just finished the Australian Birds honour in our club last week. Ixoekea (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that clarification, Ixoekea! I see that the PDFs provided by AdventSource do indeed provide that year for these honors. However, I believe what that year is referring to is the edition of the Honors Manual, not the year the honor was introduced. Whenever honor requirements are updated, the manual will include the year they were updated. Also, the edition year will be stated when an honor has now been included into the NAD manual from another Division, which is not always the same year it was introduced. I am almost certain many of these honors were created before then. If you look at the list of the ones you updated, many of them are honors that were accepted and added to the NAD manual from another division, which means that they were not necessarily introduced in that year.

Which brings me to some questions: Should the Wiki reflect the year the honor was first introduced into its division or should it list the year it was introduced to the NAD? What about honors adapted from other divisions in one year and accepted a different year into the NAD but with slight changes to the requirements (some SAD & SPD honors, such as Guitar, had their requirements modified before being accepted at GC level, and therefore NAD)? Which year should we list as introduction for those? Or is it better to just show the year the honor first came out? When I read «Year of Introduction», my immediate assumption is the year the honors first came out. Any thoughts? --w126jep (talk) 01:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

It's a blurry line. I wouldn't worry too much about it, since it could arguable be categorized as trivia. (But trivia is fun sometimes). --Jomegat (talk) 14:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi w126jep I guess I kind of got a head of myself with the information I realized that when I started looking up other honours and the dates were different. Speaking on what you were talking about. What about this idea. Or: (Original date) Rv: (Revised date?) It might give a better idea on which honours have not been updated for awhile and would be considered for updating if someone so choose to put the honour back through for a revised edition. Ixoekea (talk) 00:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I like the idea. I think there would be a way to set it up with a «if x is present, then y appears» type of function. Meaning that the year of the revised edition would only show up if there exists one. That way, those honors which have not needed to be updated won't just have a blank space in the revised date section. --w126jep (talk) 01:34, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 [[User:Ixoekea|Ixoekea]] ([[User talk:Ixoekea|talk]]) 01:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 :Thanks for that clarification, [[User:Ixoekea|Ixoekea]]! I see that the PDFs provided by Advent''Source'' do indeed provide that year for these honors. However, I believe what that year is referring to is the edition of the Honors Manual, '''not''' the year the honor was introduced. Whenever honor requirements are updated, the manual will include the year they were updated. Also, the edition year will be stated when an honor has now been '''included''' into the NAD manual from another Division, which is not always the same year it was introduced. I am almost certain many of these honors were created before then. If you look at the list of the ones you updated, many of them are honors that were accepted and added to the NAD manual from another division, which means that they were not necessarily introduced in that year.
-:Which brings me to some questions: Should the Wiki reflect the year the honor was first introduced into its division or should it list the year it was introduced to the NAD? What about honors adapted from other divisions in one year and accepted a different year into the NAD but with slight changes to the requirements (some SAD & SPD honors, such as Guitar, had their requirements modified before being accepted at GC level, and therefore NAD)? Which year should we list as introduction for those? Or is it better to just show the year the honor first came out? When I read «Year of Introduction», my immeidate assumption is the year the honors first came out. Any thoughts? --[[User:W126jep|w126jep]] ([[User talk:W126jep|talk]]) 01:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
+:Which brings me to some questions: Should the Wiki reflect the year the honor was first introduced into its division or should it list the year it was introduced to the NAD? What about honors adapted from other divisions in one year and accepted a different year into the NAD but with slight changes to the requirements (some SAD & SPD honors, such as Guitar, had their requirements modified before being accepted at GC level, and therefore NAD)? Which year should we list as introduction for those? Or is it better to just show the year the honor first came out? When I read «Year of Introduction», my immediate assumption is the year the honors first came out. Any thoughts? --[[User:W126jep|w126jep]] ([[User talk:W126jep|talk]]) 01:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 ::It's a blurry line.  I wouldn't worry too much about it, since it could arguable be categorized as trivia. (But trivia is fun sometimes). --[[User:Jomegat|Jomegat]] ([[User talk:Jomegat|talk]]) 14:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 Hi [[User:W126jep|w126jep]] I guess I kind of got a head of myself with the information I realized that when I started looking up other honours and the dates were different. Speaking on what you were talking about. What about this idea. Or: (Original date) Rv: (Revised date?) It might give a better idea on which honours have not been updated for awhile and would be considered for updating if someone so choose to put the honour back through for a revised edition. [[User:Ixoekea|Ixoekea]] ([[User talk:Ixoekea|talk]]) 00:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
+:I like the idea. I think there would be a way to set it up with a «if x is present, then y appears» type of function. Meaning that the year of the revised edition would only show up if there exists one. That way, those honors which have not needed to be updated won't just have a blank space in the revised date section. --[[User:W126jep|w126jep]] ([[User talk:W126jep|talk]]) 01:34, 17 November 2016 (UTC)