3 ms·
> Your link is a scanned paper article Which is formatted properly and has references cited correctly. It is organized and precise. It would be better if you
by fargle 7y ago
> Your link is a scanned paper article
Which is formatted properly and has references cited correctly. It is organized and precise.
It would be better if you found the real PDF. What is NOT OK is to link to the back of a manual that is a reformatted version that is already not a primary reference.
When I said "JUNK" that is exactly the kind of sloppiness I'm talking about.
- brazzy 7y ago> It would be better if you found the real PDF. If you find an authoritative source available online, I would be more than happy to change the link, but since that doesn't seem to exist and hosting a copy myself would be a violation of copyright, I did the best I could do. > What is NOT OK is to link to the back of a manual that is a reformatted version that is already not a primary reference. What exactly about it is "NOT OK"? The content is the same, it is structured the same, it also contains the citations. The only thing that is different is the formatting. > When I said "JUNK" that is exactly the kind of sloppiness I'm talking about. Which only reflects badly on you, not me.