Forum:History of the Manual of Style: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-[Ff]orum archives header +archive)) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive|Panopticon archives}}[[category:policy changers]] | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
<div style="margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em;border:1px dashed #2f2cb8;">This article was moved from its original name of '''Forum:Manual of Style''', because it was interfering with searching for "manual of style" from the search box. It has otherwise not been changed since it was archived. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}</div> | <div style="margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em;border:1px dashed #2f2cb8;">This article was moved from its original name of '''Forum:Manual of Style''', because it was interfering with searching for "manual of style" from the search box. It has otherwise not been changed since it was archived. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}</div> | ||
Latest revision as of 00:04, 7 May 2012
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → History of the Manual of Style
This article was moved from its original name of Forum:Manual of Style, because it was interfering with searching for "manual of style" from the search box. It has otherwise not been changed since it was archived.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍
Well, by combining material from Wookiepedia, the Doctor Who WikiProject at Wikipedia, Memory Alpha, and some ideas suggested on this wiki, I've worked out the makings of a Manual of Style. As stated in the introduction, if you think something needs to be addressed, please post your suggestions on the Manual's discussion page or here, rather than making your own changes to the manual. Thanks! --Freethinker1of1 22:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well done on doing this. Clearly a lot of work has gone in to this and I think it's excellent. Just what we needed. Just two things occur to me immediately. Firstly, maybe the 'In-Uninverse'/'Out of Universe' explanations should be right at the top preceded by a clear statement that the majority of articles on this wiki should be written from an in-universe perspective. Secondly, if we're following the Memory Alpha style of crediting sources in articles at the end of each paragraph, then a seperate Sources section for each article is probably unecessary.
- Now we've got these guidlines perhaps we should look at trying to attract more people to come here and contribute. We need a little advertising and promotion. Any ideas?
- --Mantrid 05:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
