m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-\[\[[Ff]orum:The Howling +[[Howling:The Howling)) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:*Plot holes, continuity conflicts with other stories, and bloopers which got past the editing process all go here. | :*Plot holes, continuity conflicts with other stories, and bloopers which got past the editing process all go here. | ||
::''These may be explained and placed in round brackets and italics.'' (This is not a necessity, some statements or questions can just be left as is without answers.) | ::''These may be explained and placed in round brackets and italics.'' (This is not a necessity, some statements or questions can just be left as is without answers.) | ||
::''This area should not be used as a discussion forum for elements of disagreement of the story. Discussions of this type may be conducted in [[ | ::''This area should not be used as a discussion forum for elements of disagreement of the story. Discussions of this type may be conducted in [[Howling:The Howling]]'' | ||
I'm noticing that on a number of television episode pages (such as ''[[The End of Time (TV story)|The End of Time]]'') these sections are becoming collections of nitpicks and almost approaching discussion status. There is also a large amount of speculation found within, and it is getting to the point where it seems like more time is spent on speculating and changing the speculations of other people rather than making the article the best that it can be. | I'm noticing that on a number of television episode pages (such as ''[[The End of Time (TV story)|The End of Time]]'') these sections are becoming collections of nitpicks and almost approaching discussion status. There is also a large amount of speculation found within, and it is getting to the point where it seems like more time is spent on speculating and changing the speculations of other people rather than making the article the best that it can be. | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:I certainly think we should state no speculation in this section, I know I'm often removing stuff that starts with "maybe", "probably" or "perhaps". | :I certainly think we should state no speculation in this section, I know I'm often removing stuff that starts with "maybe", "probably" or "perhaps". | ||
:Something like [[The Dæmons]] has a good interesting discontinuity section, even something as continuity heavy as ''[[Remembrance of the Daleks]]'' has relevant interesting information. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 05:51, January 11, 2010 (UTC) | :Something like [[The Dæmons]] has a good interesting discontinuity section, even something as continuity heavy as ''[[Remembrance of the Daleks]]'' has relevant interesting information. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 05:51, January 11, 2010 (UTC) | ||
::I think we may have to be resigned to the fact that, shortly after an episode airs, there's going to be an explosion of speculation for that page. I'm willing to accept that as long as, after the excitement dies down, we go back and separate the wheat from the chaff. [[User:Monkey with a Gun|Monkey with a Gun]] 05:55, January 11, 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:51, 5 October 2011
Discontinuities sections[[edit]]
The current format for television stories (and I presume others) reads as follows:
- Plot holes, continuity conflicts with other stories, and bloopers which got past the editing process all go here.
- These may be explained and placed in round brackets and italics. (This is not a necessity, some statements or questions can just be left as is without answers.)
- This area should not be used as a discussion forum for elements of disagreement of the story. Discussions of this type may be conducted in Howling:The Howling
I'm noticing that on a number of television episode pages (such as The End of Time) these sections are becoming collections of nitpicks and almost approaching discussion status. There is also a large amount of speculation found within, and it is getting to the point where it seems like more time is spent on speculating and changing the speculations of other people rather than making the article the best that it can be.
It seems to me (and I may be wrong and out of line here) that we need to revisit these sections and perhaps come up with a better approach to their content and purpose. Thoughts? -- sulfur 18:24, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
- There shouldn't be any speculation in the discontinuity section.
- The idea is still relatively good, most of the story pages from 1963-1989 show this. But perhaps a re-evaluation as what for the future this section is going to be about and what discussion can be shoved into the Howling.
- The problem is that as the description currently stands it's all useful information (in theory).
- I certainly think we should state no speculation in this section, I know I'm often removing stuff that starts with "maybe", "probably" or "perhaps".
- Something like The Dæmons has a good interesting discontinuity section, even something as continuity heavy as Remembrance of the Daleks has relevant interesting information. --Tangerineduel 05:51, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I think we may have to be resigned to the fact that, shortly after an episode airs, there's going to be an explosion of speculation for that page. I'm willing to accept that as long as, after the excitement dies down, we go back and separate the wheat from the chaff. Monkey with a Gun 05:55, January 11, 2010 (UTC)