Talk:Facsimile/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Is this really encyclopedic? -- X-G 22:42, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

inaccurate

Based on the article's definition of facsimile I highly doubt that the first facsimile sent across the Atlantic was as listed. Presumably many facsimiles were sent before the telephone was invented. I'm getting rid of that nonsense. Also getting rid of the statement about horny people. Doesn't really belong imo. —msh210 00:30, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Redirected to Fax

Why does this page need to be deleted, it just needs to be forwarded to Fax —Preceding unsigned comment added by Borb (talk • contribs)

I don't know if either deletion or a redirect is warranted. The article has been linked to articles with unique meaning in 12 other languages. If it should be redirected to fax, there needs to be a terminology section distinguishing the content from the delivery technology. What's awkward is that, unless you are talking about fax technology or the history of fax usage, there isn't much to say. It's not about the image as much as it is about how the image is transported. One could make a case that it could be redirected to the image article as well. Oicumayberight (talk) 19:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

But what about actual facsimilies?

Given that hardly anyone bothers to say more than "fax", shouldn't the true meaning of facsimile still be listed (instead of everything being redirected to fax), more than the mention of "facsimile books" at the end of the fax page. They aren't books sent by fax... :-) --Bluegreen 6 July 2005 00:26 (UTC)

Books

Isn't there anything to write about facsimile printes of books? 82.212.68.183 19:03, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes indeed! I have just discovered that this page has been turned into a redirect to fax, but I think that's a major goof. We need something about facimile reproductions of books, in particular medieval ones, such as (off the top of my head) the Book of Kells. Lupo 08:50, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

2007-02-1 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 11:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)