Talk:Errata of Five Volume Set

From WikiPOBia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(All errata?)
Line 2: Line 2:
== All errata? ==
== All errata? ==
I think this could be better used as a reference for all versions instead of just the five volume set.  It might also work better incorporated into the book articles themselves as opposed to separate articles for each publication. --[[User:LadyShelley|LadyShelley]] 05:37, 28 April 2009 (BST)
I think this could be better used as a reference for all versions instead of just the five volume set.  It might also work better incorporated into the book articles themselves as opposed to separate articles for each publication. --[[User:LadyShelley|LadyShelley]] 05:37, 28 April 2009 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
I've found the only the five volume set has so many blatant errors. Many of these errors are not in the original hardcover set. I own both and use the hardcover set to double check the volumes. I wouldn't want to imply that they are in every edition by incorporating this errata into the book articles themselves. [[User:Lunumbra|Lunumbra]] 11:11, 29 April 2009 (BST)

Revision as of 10:11, 29 April 2009

All errata?

I think this could be better used as a reference for all versions instead of just the five volume set. It might also work better incorporated into the book articles themselves as opposed to separate articles for each publication. --LadyShelley 05:37, 28 April 2009 (BST)


I've found the only the five volume set has so many blatant errors. Many of these errors are not in the original hardcover set. I own both and use the hardcover set to double check the volumes. I wouldn't want to imply that they are in every edition by incorporating this errata into the book articles themselves. Lunumbra 11:11, 29 April 2009 (BST)

Personal tools