User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-26975268-20130201045831/@comment-188432-20130222034602: Difference between revisions
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I think that's a little strong, SOTO. Doug's suggestion isn't "going against everything this wiki stands for". As a frequent user of MA, I understand their organisation system well. Indeed, [[User:Sulfur|Sulfur]] once proposed the MA system in our forums. | I think that's a little strong, SOTO. Doug's suggestion isn't "going against everything this wiki stands for". As a frequent user of MA, I understand their organisation system well. Indeed, [[User:Sulfur|Sulfur]] once proposed the MA system in our forums. | ||
| Line 11: | Line 10: | ||
Really good idea, though. | Really good idea, though. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20130201045831-26975268/20130222034602-188432]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 22:49, 27 April 2023
I think that's a little strong, SOTO. Doug's suggestion isn't "going against everything this wiki stands for". As a frequent user of MA, I understand their organisation system well. Indeed, Sulfur once proposed the MA system in our forums.
And it went over like a lead balloon.
The reason is pretty simple. Most Star Trek fiction uses stardates, so they don't have a lot of in-universe "normal" calendar days to deal with.
The DWU only uses days of the year, and precise dates are often crucial to the telling of DWU stories. Consequently, there's often enough information about in-universe days of the month to justify a page under our usual article-creation rules.
In short, the MA "all on a month page" approach won't work just because of the inherent difference in the franchises.
Really good idea, though.
