Forum:Temporary forums/Subpage policy: Difference between revisions

Forum:Temporary forums/Subpage policy (view source)

Revision as of 14:54, 5 October 2022

1,692 bytes added , 5 October 2022

no edit summary

NateBumber

emailconfirmed, Administrators

15,041

edits

@@ Line 143: / Line 143: @@
 I think splitting off plot summaries is something that could work, but I personally am very strongly against any split of TV/EU stuff, as I am with rewriting the pages to put it into the lead. Obviously this would come up in the forum discussions about it though. :> [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 :I hear your objection to prioritisation of TV content loud and clear. Obviously it's only a matter which would apply to "TV first" characters with extremely long pages – mainly the Doctors and their companions – so it wouldn't affect the pages which you and I are most fond of editing. But hopefully [[Special:Diff/3099698]] isn't really ''so'' objectionable? I'm, uhh, rather hoping this can get done without needing the forums – which is to say, that it can get done ''ever'' – so please do respond. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 17:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
-::I've added sections explicitly addressing these concerns using the examples of [[Tenth Doctor#Appearance]] and [[Tenth Doctor#Biography]], btw. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 19:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
+:I've added sections explicitly addressing these concerns using the examples of [[Tenth Doctor#Appearance]] and [[Tenth Doctor#Biography]], btw. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 19:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
-:::I think a better example to illustrate my qualms is [[Sutekh]]. This is an article with a substantial amount of EU content that's arguably integral page as we've written it. I ''cannot imagine'' that it's acceptable to rewrite this page to focus on the TV appearances of this character, or even what such a rewrite to this page could look like. Thankfully, this is one instance where the issue of subpages to trim excess content doesn't yet seem relevant, but the basic issue here is the same. It seems bizarre to me that, say, [[Anne Travers]], could have her article rewritten to focus on a single story she appeared in on TV - were it to get too long. (Yes I did find a random character that Candy Jar was using, why do you ask?) Or even [[Kate Stewart]], a character that originated in non BBC media, has an extensive life outside of the BBC show, whose rights are owned by someone other than the BBC. Her page is ''reasonably'' large. It's 211 on [[Special:LongPages]]. Which isn't super up there, but isn't nothing either. ([[Alistair Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart]] meets two of those three criteria! And his is 38 on LongPages!)
+::I think a better example to illustrate my qualms is [[Sutekh]]. This is an article with a substantial amount of EU content that's arguably integral page as we've written it. I ''cannot imagine'' that it's acceptable to rewrite this page to focus on the TV appearances of this character, or even what such a rewrite to this page could look like. Thankfully, this is one instance where the issue of subpages to trim excess content doesn't yet seem relevant, but the basic issue here is the same. It seems bizarre to me that, say, [[Anne Travers]], could have her article rewritten to focus on a single story she appeared in on TV - were it to get too long. (Yes I did find a random character that Candy Jar was using, why do you ask?) Or even [[Kate Stewart]], a character that originated in non BBC media, has an extensive life outside of the BBC show, whose rights are owned by someone other than the BBC. Her page is ''reasonably'' large. It's 211 on [[Special:LongPages]]. Which isn't super up there, but isn't nothing either. ([[Alistair Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart]] meets two of those three criteria! And his is 38 on LongPages!)
-:::Perhaps it's an ideological issue for me and we'll just never agree. But this change seems counterproductive, in violation of both the spirit and the letter of [[T:NPOV]]. It seems like it provides fodder for those in the fanbase who want to relegate the expanded universe material to a second class status (though, of course, I know you don't intend this), which I'm ''strongly'' against, and the fact that Doctor Who doesn't do this is part of why I'm here.
+::Perhaps it's an ideological issue for me and we'll just never agree. But this change seems counterproductive, in violation of both the spirit and the letter of [[T:NPOV]]. It seems like it provides fodder for those in the fanbase who want to relegate the expanded universe material to a second class status (though, of course, I know you don't intend this), which I'm ''strongly'' against, and the fact that Doctor Who doesn't do this is part of why I'm here.
-:::But in all honesty I don't think this is the best way to help our users. What is the problem we're trying to solve? We want a way for people to find out what information comes from what sources easily, if they wish to do so, on mobile, quickly, where they might lack cmd+f, without privileging TV sources. Is there a way to do this? I think there has to be - and I think giving up and privileging TV sources is defeatist, no offense meant.
+::But in all honesty I don't think this is the best way to help our users. What is the problem we're trying to solve? We want a way for people to find out what information comes from what sources easily, if they wish to do so, on mobile, quickly, where they might lack cmd+f, without privileging TV sources. Is there a way to do this? I think there has to be - and I think giving up and privileging TV sources is defeatist, no offense meant.
-:::I'd like to propose an alternative. A change to [[T:BOLD]]. See [[User:Najawin/sandbox]]. I think this change makes it ''substantially'' easier for a user to scroll down a page looking for "TV" as a source for a statement. If need be, we might also float a proposal that prefixes be resized slightly. But I think this option is more in keeping with [[T:NPOV]], can be automated by a bot, and serves the [[not we]] reasonably well, if not better. (Though I admit the last bit is a matter of ideological debate.) [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
+::I'd like to propose an alternative. A change to [[T:BOLD]]. See [[User:Najawin/sandbox]]. I think this change makes it ''substantially'' easier for a user to scroll down a page looking for "TV" as a source for a statement. If need be, we might also float a proposal that prefixes be resized slightly. But I think this option is more in keeping with [[T:NPOV]], can be automated by a bot, and serves the [[not we]] reasonably well, if not better. (Though I admit the last bit is a matter of ideological debate.) [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
+:::Defeatist? Bah! Humbug!
+:::Thanks for explaining your point of view; I really appreciate the outside interpretation of what I've written. I think your disagreement is with the letter of what I've written, not its spirit, and I'll have to spend some time figuring out how to better capture and convey that spirit to avoid any kind of misunderstanding.
+:::For instance: "It seems bizarre to me that, say, [[Anne Travers]], could have her article rewritten to focus on a single story she appeared in on TV - were it to get too long." Yes, that would be bizarre. By "prioritise" I didn't mean "make her TV appearance the focus". I simply meant "a summary might omit her minor appearances in ''[[Lethbridge-Stewart (series)|Lethbridge-Stewart]]'' short stories,<ref>I know very little about the ''Lethbridge-Stewart'' series, but let's assume there are a few stories where she appears briefly or as a background character.</ref> but it should not fail to mention her appearance on TV, however minor". This does not mean that the TV story suddenly becomes the "focus", nor does it have any bearing on the presence of other, non-TV content in the summary, as appropriate. Maybe there's a better word than "prioritise" to capture what I'm trying to say here.
+:::I like your [[T:BOLD]] idea, but I don't think it's comprehensive enough to replace this proposal in its entirety, and it rather assumes a reader's familiarity with our prefixing system. Regardless, it might make for a good complement to [[User:Bongolium500|Bongolium500]]'s innovative source referencing proposals at [[User:Bongolium500/Sandbox 5]]! – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 14:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 == Footnotes ==
 {{reflist}}