Forum:Introduction of Portal Pages: Difference between revisions

{{archive|Panopticon archives}}

An example page can be seen [[Portal:Companions|here]] and the colour-coding is optional. I have included a table of positives and negatives of introducing this feature, feel free to add to it.

:::Taking the Fourth Doctor example, the most likely course of action were they looking would be to put [[Tom Baker]] into the search box, or [[Fourth Doctor]], on the Fourth Doctor page less than a third of the way down is a thumbnail with [[:file:Doctor4-3.jpg|this image]] (which has the caption 'The Doctor and [[Leela]]).

::I would disagree with a comment above that suggests the portal should not replace the List of companions. I absolutely think it should, if it's done well. This place is seriously, depressingly, bone-wearyingly list happy. We should be actively looking for ways to reduce the total number of lists, or to make the lists impart more than ''just'' a list. '''Every single page on this wiki should strive to inform and surprise our readers, not just provide the same old information in the same old way that it can be found on a dozen other sites.''' List of companions is an embarrassment, frankly, so I'd like to see [[User:SquirrelBoy|SquirrelBoy]] continue right along with developing this idea further. He's absolutely right on the money suggesting that the more we can brighten up the place, the more people will be attracted the site. The concept of what he's trying to do here isn't flawed; it's just that we need to realize ''Doctor Who'' is a unique franchise, and the things that work on wikis supporting other franchises won't work without modification here. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 22:21, May 8, 2010 (UTC)

::I agree with the inform, and surprise to a point, but not dazzle not for the sake of being glitzy.

::The List of companions does what it says in the title, it's a list, it's not meant to be dazzling, it's meant to provide information in a straight forward easy to navigate manner.

::As far as the amount of work that will need to be done, ''if'' this gets rolled out it'll likely get rolled out across the main bits of the site.

::But if you're looking at developing the idea, Torchwood would likely be an easy platform to develop for as their main character diminish as the series went on, SJA changes here and there.

:::I'd agree with that, [[:User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]]: any development of this '''definitely''' needs to be on user pages, not any sort of mainspace page.

 

:::Just to go back to a slightly earlier point about balance between visual and non-visual companions, I really don't think you '''can''' include representations of non-visual companions seen on covers. Big Finsh/book covers are not, in themselves, in-universe. They are '''pictures being used to market a work''', which is quite a different thing than an actual representation of an event in the DWU. Remember, all these photographic images of, say, the Fifth Doctor on BFA audios are photographs that date to the 1980s. They are scenes/publicity shots that are drawn from Davison's time on the television show. Thus, no matter how much they might be manipulated, they are not an actual representation of the character '''in that adventure'''. And things which are done with, say, [[Hex]] or whoever are specially-done publicity shots. They are the actor dressed up on a costume, which is a different than the character. In truth, we '''don't know''' what [[Lucie Miller]] looks like. She ''might'' look like [[Sheridan Smith]]; she might not. So, from a philosophical standpoint, I'm quite opposed to these sort of images being used on their character pages, much less on this proposed portal page. Usually, I'm the first guy up for using pictures and other visual elements to enhance a page, but putting up a picture of [[Lisa Bowerman]] as [[Benny]] is a no-no, in my book. Far as I can tell, the only legitimate pic of Benny is from a comic strip that once appeared in DWM.

 

 

::::One little thing: "... putting up a picture of [[Lisa Bowerman]] as [[Benny]] is a no-no, in my book" But that's exactly what we have on Benny's page. And in fact many other BFA companions. If it's good enough for the article, why isn't it good enough for a portal?

::::I think Benny is an exception--she's been described extensively in the later novels, she's been illustrated multiple times, and she looks like Lisa Bowerman--or at least as much like Lisa Bowerman as the picture of Captain Jack in The Doctor Dances looks like John Barrowman. (The fact that early on she was also described at least a little, and illustrated a few times, and looked very different--well, she also lived in the wrong century early on, if you're looking for continuity errors.)

::::But as I said, she's an exception. We really have very little clue what Lucie looks like. (And using Sheridan's picture in the article seems like a mistake to me--we can show it farther down, in the Behind the Scenes section, but in the infobox?) We know what Sam Jones looks like, but we don't have any good photos to match her with. And of course we know that Mary Shelley looked like real-life paintings and daguerros of Mary Shelley, not like the drawings of her on a BFA cover or DWM preview, much less like any Doctor Who actor.

::::So, that's why I suggested that TV companions should have photos, comics companions should have comic illustrations, and novel and audio companions should just have text. --[[User:Falcotron|Falcotron]] 11:07, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

::As for your first paragraph, my response would be that it's '''not''' good enough for the article. There's a perfectly valid, in-universe picture of Benny from her comic strip appearance. That's the only '''indisputably''' in-universe picture we have, and it fits the prose descriptions too. [[Tardis:Manual of Style#Image use]] is currently inconsistent in that it allows audio covers but disallows promotional pictures, not, perhaps, considering that audio covers '''are''' promotional pictures. But I don't think there's any question but that an image from a comic strip, which is definitively in-universe, is superior to an audio cover, which, well, isn't. '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]''' [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 17:01, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

:::Suitably cropped covers are useful as they are often the only image that we're likely to get of some elements. The Missing and New Adventure covers have usable images, as do many of the audio covers, covers in general display elements from the stories. Even one or two Black Sheep covers (they're the company that did the EDAs/PDAs) which aren't that bad; ''[[Mad Dogs and Englishmen]]'' and ''[[The Ancestor Cell]]'' both have usable images. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 17:19, May 18, 2010 (UTC)