Forum:Trivia sections: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
m (Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users 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 ~~~~ --> | ||
I don't want to be all 'wikipedia' but, Trivia sections are discouraged. Information that is in these 'Trivia' sections can easily be integrated into the main article. Or in the case of it being 'real world' info on an in-universe article it can be placed below and integrated into a behind the scenes section. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 14:15, September 1, 2009 (UTC) | I don't want to be all 'wikipedia' but, Trivia sections are discouraged. Information that is in these 'Trivia' sections can easily be integrated into the main article. Or in the case of it being 'real world' info on an in-universe article it can be placed below and integrated into a behind the scenes section. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 14:15, September 1, 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 8: | Line 7: | ||
::I've removed all the examples that I could find that were around. (I don't think you should be worried) However here are the history comparisons from a few: [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Elton_Pope&diff=235260&oldid=235248 Elton Pope], [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Nursery_Ship&diff=235275&oldid=147840 Nursery ship] and [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Xaranti&diff=235269&oldid=232042 Xaranti]. In the case of the Elton Pope article it was just a case of re-titling the trivia to behind the scenes and re-wording the information to be more formal. For the Nursery ship article the trivia section was removed as it used subjective phrases like "seems to be inspired by" (if the information had a source or something it could have been placed on the ''Partners in Crime'' article page (which relates to the whole episode rather than the in-universe article specific page). For the Xaranti article page the information was re-edited with the subjective/not relevant in an in-universe context information removed. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 15:59, September 4, 2009 (UTC) | ::I've removed all the examples that I could find that were around. (I don't think you should be worried) However here are the history comparisons from a few: [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Elton_Pope&diff=235260&oldid=235248 Elton Pope], [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Nursery_Ship&diff=235275&oldid=147840 Nursery ship] and [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=Xaranti&diff=235269&oldid=232042 Xaranti]. In the case of the Elton Pope article it was just a case of re-titling the trivia to behind the scenes and re-wording the information to be more formal. For the Nursery ship article the trivia section was removed as it used subjective phrases like "seems to be inspired by" (if the information had a source or something it could have been placed on the ''Partners in Crime'' article page (which relates to the whole episode rather than the in-universe article specific page). For the Xaranti article page the information was re-edited with the subjective/not relevant in an in-universe context information removed. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 15:59, September 4, 2009 (UTC) | ||
::: I agree that trivia that can be integrated into the main article should be ''when possible'', but I definitely would not like to see a Wikipedia-style prohibition on this sort of material. Personally I enjoy reading these bits and pieces after I've watched an episode. Of course like everything else trivia should be policed from time to time for obvious nonsense, but I don't see the harm. Some trivia, though, might more appropriately go into the "rumours and myths" sections (such as the Partners in Crime example Tangerineduel gives above). [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 17:57, September 23, 2009 (UTC) | ::: I agree that trivia that can be integrated into the main article should be ''when possible'', but I definitely would not like to see a Wikipedia-style prohibition on this sort of material. Personally I enjoy reading these bits and pieces after I've watched an episode. Of course like everything else trivia should be policed from time to time for obvious nonsense, but I don't see the harm. Some trivia, though, might more appropriately go into the "rumours and myths" sections (such as the Partners in Crime example Tangerineduel gives above). [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 17:57, September 23, 2009 (UTC) | ||
==Archivist's notes== | |||
In practice, articles don't carry trivia sections anymore. Thus, [[user:Tangerineduel]]'s original suggestion carried, and [[user:23skidoo]]'s desire to keep some form of trivia section hasn't predominated. As someone has once point out — somewhere — the entire site is about trivia, so having a trivia section on articles is both redundant and highly subjective. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}'''19:24:33 Thu '''26 May 2011 </span> | |||
Latest revision as of 04:33, 28 August 2012
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Trivia sections
I don't want to be all 'wikipedia' but, Trivia sections are discouraged. Information that is in these 'Trivia' sections can easily be integrated into the main article. Or in the case of it being 'real world' info on an in-universe article it can be placed below and integrated into a behind the scenes section. --Tangerineduel 14:15, September 1, 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, did you have any specific examples in mind? (Should I be 'worried'?!) The Librarian 11:21, September 3, 2009 (UTC)
- I've removed all the examples that I could find that were around. (I don't think you should be worried) However here are the history comparisons from a few: Elton Pope, Nursery ship and Xaranti. In the case of the Elton Pope article it was just a case of re-titling the trivia to behind the scenes and re-wording the information to be more formal. For the Nursery ship article the trivia section was removed as it used subjective phrases like "seems to be inspired by" (if the information had a source or something it could have been placed on the Partners in Crime article page (which relates to the whole episode rather than the in-universe article specific page). For the Xaranti article page the information was re-edited with the subjective/not relevant in an in-universe context information removed. --Tangerineduel 15:59, September 4, 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that trivia that can be integrated into the main article should be when possible, but I definitely would not like to see a Wikipedia-style prohibition on this sort of material. Personally I enjoy reading these bits and pieces after I've watched an episode. Of course like everything else trivia should be policed from time to time for obvious nonsense, but I don't see the harm. Some trivia, though, might more appropriately go into the "rumours and myths" sections (such as the Partners in Crime example Tangerineduel gives above). 23skidoo 17:57, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
- I've removed all the examples that I could find that were around. (I don't think you should be worried) However here are the history comparisons from a few: Elton Pope, Nursery ship and Xaranti. In the case of the Elton Pope article it was just a case of re-titling the trivia to behind the scenes and re-wording the information to be more formal. For the Nursery ship article the trivia section was removed as it used subjective phrases like "seems to be inspired by" (if the information had a source or something it could have been placed on the Partners in Crime article page (which relates to the whole episode rather than the in-universe article specific page). For the Xaranti article page the information was re-edited with the subjective/not relevant in an in-universe context information removed. --Tangerineduel 15:59, September 4, 2009 (UTC)
Archivist's notes[[edit source]]
In practice, articles don't carry trivia sections anymore. Thus, user:Tangerineduel's original suggestion carried, and user:23skidoo's desire to keep some form of trivia section hasn't predominated. As someone has once point out — somewhere — the entire site is about trivia, so having a trivia section on articles is both redundant and highly subjective.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 19:24:33 Thu 26 May 2011
