Template talk:Faction Paradox members: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:::: I suppose so. We could have her entry be <nowiki>[[Ceol]]/[[Kelsey Hooper]]</nowiki>, which is within precedent, but I'm not sure it's entirely worth it? But I wouldn't be ''opposed'' to it, by any stretch of the imagination. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>Epsilon</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 01:15, 9 September 2022 (UTC) | :::: I suppose so. We could have her entry be <nowiki>[[Ceol]]/[[Kelsey Hooper]]</nowiki>, which is within precedent, but I'm not sure it's entirely worth it? But I wouldn't be ''opposed'' to it, by any stretch of the imagination. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>Epsilon</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 01:15, 9 September 2022 (UTC) | ||
::::: I'm totally against that. | |||
::::: The whole reason the Kelsey/Ceol pages were split was because the appearances made by Ceol never had a license to use that character. To include her on a template which relates to unlicensed material for that specific character makes that decision redundant. We shouldn't be trying to find ways to bypass licensing, surely? Why is speculation allowed in navboxes anyway? [[User:DrWHOCorrieFan|DrWHOCorrieFan]] [[User talk:DrWHOCorrieFan|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:20, 9 September 2022
Just a question
Since Navboxes allow speculation? Is there precedent for this? Najawin ☎ 00:36, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- Forgive me, but I'm not entirely sure I follow. Would you mind rephrasing your point? 00:47, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- I, like Epsilon, am completely lost? DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 00:59, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- So we can't identify Ceol and Kelsey, they don't qualify for the homeworld treatment, and this means that we also can't give Kelsey the relevant categories. Everything goes in BTS sections. But we don't have official Navbox policy written down (and I can't find any discussion about it, and I have asked, see Talk:Scarlett Johansson), and what I've gathered is that speculation is allowed as to how we categorize things in them. So then the Navbox could perhaps include Kelsey in it as well as Ceol? Najawin ☎ 01:12, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose so. We could have her entry be [[Ceol]]/[[Kelsey Hooper]], which is within precedent, but I'm not sure it's entirely worth it? But I wouldn't be opposed to it, by any stretch of the imagination. 01:15, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- I'm totally against that.
- The whole reason the Kelsey/Ceol pages were split was because the appearances made by Ceol never had a license to use that character. To include her on a template which relates to unlicensed material for that specific character makes that decision redundant. We shouldn't be trying to find ways to bypass licensing, surely? Why is speculation allowed in navboxes anyway? DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 01:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
