Forum:Adding "part of" to LOAs

Index → The Panopticon → Adding "part of" to LOAs

Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

OP

Just a simple little one today, I'll try and keep it quick.

Right, so, when creating lists of appearances, note we have a column for "series", but we really ought to have a column for if it's part of an anthology or something as well. Currently, the workaround is either to make the "series" section span multiple rows, and have the anthology or whatever as part of that, or, if the anthology is part of a specific series, to place it after the series with a colon. This is a very messy situation, and to remedy it I propose a new column, "part of". An example of how this might work can be seen at User:Aquanafrahudy/LOA proposal.

Sorry about not being terribly eloquent, but there you are.

Thanks for reading, Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 17:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

I like your proposed layout- feels much more natural and easier to read. I support your proposal. -User:ThetaSigmaEarChef

For another example, please see User:Aquanafrahudy/Coloth/Appearances. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 11:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the example. I support this idea too. Very helpful. — Fractal Doctor @ 21:06, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Does look quite nice. I'm not sure about extending its use to something broader like "[Publisher]'s [X]th anniversary releases" or the like, though; I think that's if anything closer to a series than an anthology, it's a different meaning of "part of" altogether. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 22:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Support this! Would propose switching the "Series" and "Part of" columns around — that would make most of the table go roughly* from "specific" to "broad" as you go from left to right, and I think that'd be more intuitive. (The currently proposed ordering is also particularly confusing for things like Short Trips and The Tenth Doctor Chronicles, which share a name with the series they're a part of.)

*It occasionally happens that a work is classified by the wiki as part of a series while the anthology it's published in isn't (see Horrors of Arcbeatle for examples), but most of the time — in my experience — they match up.

jsmith5504^{talk to me} 10:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

To me personally, it feels more intuitive to have it the other way around; you don't write The Book of the Enemy: Faction Paradox, you write Faction Paradox: The Book of the Enemy. However, I understand I may be in the minority in this, and would appreciate others' thoughts on the matter.

Fair enough on the anniversary releases, though. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 10:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC) (edited 10:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC))

Overall, having worked on User:Epsilon/History proofing/Appearances with this proposal in mind, the separation of series and anthology-type-release seems entirely helpful. I am perhaps mildly concerned about having enough rows in a table so there are too many lines breaks, but I don't think this will reach that point.

I also agree with @jsmith5504's suggestion "part of" should go before "series".

And finally, would something like "Doctor Who Series 5" remain in series? I think that would be better than moving it.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

21:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, having "part of" after "series" would mean that we could do "Doctor Who" as a long thing going down, and you can see all the stories where a character appeared in Doctor Who, and then for the part of you'd have "series 4", like with having "Faction Paradox" and then eg "Wallowing in Pessimism's Mire", which was very much the sort of thing which inspired the idea. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 21:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Could you please make an example?

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

22:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)