765,429
edits
Tardis:Stub: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m
Robot: Automated text replacement (-The Five Doctors +The Five Doctors (TV story))
m (upholding T:CLEAN CODE) |
m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-The Five Doctors +The Five Doctors (TV story))) |
||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
Each case is quite different. For instance, if the article on [[Cybermen]] had ''absolutely no'' information about [[Cybermat]]s of the basic nature of [[cyber-conversion]], then it could well be considered a stub, as both were major pieces of Cyber-technology. Likewise, if it failed to mention any societal structure, such the fucntional role of [[Cyber-Controller]]s and [[Cyber-Leader]]s, then it could well be considered a stub. Meanwhile the [[Optera]] don't have a lot in the way of technology, but we ''are'' able to say rather a lot about their culture. Failing to at least mention their linguistic system could potentially make the article a stub. | Each case is quite different. For instance, if the article on [[Cybermen]] had ''absolutely no'' information about [[Cybermat]]s of the basic nature of [[cyber-conversion]], then it could well be considered a stub, as both were major pieces of Cyber-technology. Likewise, if it failed to mention any societal structure, such the fucntional role of [[Cyber-Controller]]s and [[Cyber-Leader]]s, then it could well be considered a stub. Meanwhile the [[Optera]] don't have a lot in the way of technology, but we ''are'' able to say rather a lot about their culture. Failing to at least mention their linguistic system could potentially make the article a stub. | ||
Generally, too, a species article should be considered a stub if it fails to even ''mention'' information from each major appearance in the medium in which the species originated. For instance, if you were writing an article about the [[Robot Yeti]], the article would definitely be a stub if it gave details from ''[[The Abominable Snowmen]]'' but not ''[[The Web of Fear]]''. The article would be incomplete, but not a stub, if it ignored the minor appearance in ''[[The Five Doctors]]''. Nor would it be classed a stub simply because it failed to give details of the appearance in [[MA]]: ''[[Downtime]]''. | Generally, too, a species article should be considered a stub if it fails to even ''mention'' information from each major appearance in the medium in which the species originated. For instance, if you were writing an article about the [[Robot Yeti]], the article would definitely be a stub if it gave details from ''[[The Abominable Snowmen]]'' but not ''[[The Web of Fear]]''. The article would be incomplete, but not a stub, if it ignored the minor appearance in ''[[The Five Doctors (TV story)|The Five Doctors]]''. Nor would it be classed a stub simply because it failed to give details of the appearance in [[MA]]: ''[[Downtime]]''. | ||
A species article should also strive to do more than just report the encounters that species had with the Doctor, Sarah Jane, K9 or Torchwood. It should attempt to provide physical and cultural details about the race. The fact that an article is devoid of these elements, however, should not be taken as an automatic sign it is a stub. Just as there are many astronomical objects which are only incidentally mentioned, there are many species who are given short shrift by writers. | A species article should also strive to do more than just report the encounters that species had with the Doctor, Sarah Jane, K9 or Torchwood. It should attempt to provide physical and cultural details about the race. The fact that an article is devoid of these elements, however, should not be taken as an automatic sign it is a stub. Just as there are many astronomical objects which are only incidentally mentioned, there are many species who are given short shrift by writers. | ||
