Forum:Layout

Index → Panopticon → Layout

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

The Manual of style says that See also follows Behind the scenes. Surely it should be before as it is in-universe.--Skittles the hog--Talk 20:21, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the layout doesn't say anything regarding 'see also'. --Bold Clone 20:25, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

I agree that behind the scenes should be kept seperate as it is out of universe. Revanvolatrelundar 20:27, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

We're not talking of merging them, though. We're arguing whether 'See also' comes before 'Behind the scenes' section or not. --Bold Clone 20:29, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

What's the different between in-universe and out-universe 'See also'? --Bold Clone 20:30, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

I cant see what we could put as an out of universe see also, as most articles on this wikia are in universe. Revanvolatrelundar 20:32, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

@Skittles: Is it against the policies to alter the policies to win an argument? --Bold Clone 20:35, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Other episodes maybe?--Skittles the hog--Talk 20:37, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

the policies were altered as an example and not to win an arguement. Revanvolatrelundar 20:44, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

...OK...sorry for the misunderstanding there...but I think it would be better to just propose the idea to Tangerineduel first. --Bold Clone 20:47, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Bold Clone, why are you so aggressive. You deleted my comments on your pages when I warned you about vandalism. You are not helping the wiki, you are causing issues. Surely the fact that every edit you make is reverted is a hint that you are going wrong somewhere. You have reverted my edits to my own comments! I do not understand why you think you are some sort of law and order upholder when you’re merely ruining the wiki. Users have to go out of their way to revert your vandalism. I presented an issue I wanted sorting on this page and you have vandalised it with your aggressive opinion. This is an appeal for you to stop.--Skittles the hog--Talk 20:51, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure about mandating the "See also", as is noted on the Tardis:Guide to writing Individuals articles and its cover page Tardis:Guide to in-universe writing, in universe articles often have a more fluid nature to them.

Mini-mitch's description of the "See also" section looks good, but again I don't think it should be mandated, I don't want us to get into a situation where people are including the "See also" and it making the page a stub because there's nothing else to put in the "See also".

I prefer to excise the "See also" requirement from the main MoS page and then on the Tardis:Layout guide page I'll give it a re-edit, as well as the Guide to in-universe writing and the individuals articles guide to explain/include what the "See also" is, and that it's not always needed. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:31, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts on Layout

Opinions?--Skittles the hog--Talk 20:58, January 5, 2011 (UTC)

Layout change

1. --Revanvolatrelundar 21:06, January 5, 2011 (UTC)
2. --Mini-mitch 21:24, January 5, 2011 (UTC). See here on how I think it should be laid out.