Talk:Q98739533
Autodescription — On the Atmospheric Bude-Light (Q98739533)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “On the Atmospheric Bude-Light” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Thanks to have added the OCLC code. It's not so strategic in a singular case. But I find very strange the fact that the article put in the homepage of Wikisource didn't provide a bibliographical code that anyone can verify, as indicated s:en:Index talk:On the Atmospheric Bude-Light.pdf.
Otherwise, anyone could act photo editing of the original sources or omit part of the electronic or digitized copies. It depends on the available budgets and personal conflict of interests. nobody in the academy seems to give the same weight and philological reliability to Google Books, an electronic copy or a digitized copy. The latter, expecially made by a university library or a public authority, is considered the best available digital version of a paper or manuscripts text. But, if even in the era of Internet, researchers never ended to move in the real life archives, it means that nobody gives a special credit to the electronic copies. Hence, it would be important and obvious to have for each record of Wikisource, if existing, an OCLC, ISSN, DOI code, among the others that are long-time permanent and verifiable from everyone.Philosopher81sp (talk) 14:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)