6,562
edits
Forum:Magazines: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{Forum archives header|Panopticon archives}} | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
Hi, my promise to start delivering content to the TARDIS wiki has started. However I feel a little disheartened at the moment. Let me explain. I specifically chose to start contributing articles to the wiki in an area that I found to be sparse or non-existant.After a hiccup in the sandbox I started to type away feverishly having grasped the fundamentals of templates and layout. All was fine untill I found a number of rewrites that I could not explain (I thought I must be doing something wrong!).My contributions were not hasty conceived, but thought out so as to allow an overall consistancy with articles that would cover the whole range of my contributions.As '''there was no existing templates for magazines''' I used an existing template, which I simply modified categories. My disheartenment came when I was told I was | Hi, my promise to start delivering content to the TARDIS wiki has started. However I feel a little disheartened at the moment. Let me explain. I specifically chose to start contributing articles to the wiki in an area that I found to be sparse or non-existant.After a hiccup in the sandbox I started to type away feverishly having grasped the fundamentals of templates and layout. All was fine untill I found a number of rewrites that I could not explain (I thought I must be doing something wrong!).My contributions were not hasty conceived, but thought out so as to allow an overall consistancy with articles that would cover the whole range of my contributions.As '''there was no existing templates for magazines''' I used an existing template, which I simply modified categories. My disheartenment came when I was told I was doing it wrong,(albeit regarding minor edits), but without any discussion.I appreciate this is the nature of wiki but I did not find the approach reassuring or supportive. In my magazine contributions, rather than remove content headings they were deliberately left blank to show no content in that field NOT to be added later. With regards to the magazines the date I showed reflected what was on the cover (early issues were weekly, then monthly then four-weekly)by applying a template over my work that information has been lost.Contributions to the wiki seem to be sporadic, and I wonder if this general heavy handed attitude may have something to do with it. Shame as it came after a welcome box that was very much appreciated.[[User:The Librarian|The Librarian]] 16:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
:I would like to apologise if my attitude seemed heavy handed. For the categories which aren't present in the magazines it would seem better to simply not have them on the page (rather than as I assumed there was no information for it), as it is quite possible that there could be more later, thus the ''to be added'' is there to encourage people to place more information. | :I would like to apologise if my attitude seemed heavy handed. For the categories which aren't present in the magazines it would seem better to simply not have them on the page (rather than as I assumed there was no information for it), as it is quite possible that there could be more later, thus the ''to be added'' is there to encourage people to place more information. | ||
