Forum:Quote pages: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:::I was just throwing the idea out there. The Quote: namespace seems like a sound idea. | :::I was just throwing the idea out there. The Quote: namespace seems like a sound idea. | ||
:::The quotes were un-encylcopaedic as they were presented in the articles that they've been culled from, but in the edited format they are somewhat encyclopaedic. The idea of grouping the quotes by theme does work pretty much the same way (at a basic level) as a physical dictionary of quotations. The lists are...what they are; a list, ordered by the contents at the top of the page. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 14:58, May 14, 2010 (UTC) | :::The quotes were un-encylcopaedic as they were presented in the articles that they've been culled from, but in the edited format they are somewhat encyclopaedic. The idea of grouping the quotes by theme does work pretty much the same way (at a basic level) as a physical dictionary of quotations. The lists are...what they are; a list, ordered by the contents at the top of the page. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 14:58, May 14, 2010 (UTC) | ||
[[category:Out of date]] | |||
Revision as of 23:08, 22 May 2011
Template:Forum archives header 
I've been thinking we should (now that the quotes have been culled from the main space article pages) that we should still have a place for quotes. We do have Category:Companion quotes, with several companion quotes within it. I've re-edited Vislor Turlough - Quotes and created Second Doctor - Quotes (using quotes from the Second Doctor page and Quote of the Week archive) into sub-headings much like the references on the TV, prose and audio pages. I think this might be a better way to go than by story title as it would allow readers to be able to see a character's points of view across several subjects. --Tangerineduel 14:32, May 7, 2010 (UTC)
- If quotes are unencyclopedic, then what's the justification for having quote pages at all? I don't like these pages within the mainspace, personally. If you want to create an entirely separate namespace — e.g., Quote:Vislor Turlough — that's one thing. Indeed, that would make it easier to manipulate these pages in the future. Might even be possible to manipulate a quote of the day feature, automatically choosing a quote drawn from the Quote: namespace. But having these pages in the mainspace makes little sense given our simultaneous campaign to get rid of quotes on other mainspace pages. Plus, they're just ugly lists. We need to establish some kind of visual framework for them, perhaps even a standard table format. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 00:11, May 13, 2010 (UTC)
- I was just throwing the idea out there. The Quote: namespace seems like a sound idea.
- The quotes were un-encylcopaedic as they were presented in the articles that they've been culled from, but in the edited format they are somewhat encyclopaedic. The idea of grouping the quotes by theme does work pretty much the same way (at a basic level) as a physical dictionary of quotations. The lists are...what they are; a list, ordered by the contents at the top of the page. --Tangerineduel 14:58, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
