We need to develop style standards! We'll update these as consensus dictates.
Character format Change
i think that the character format should be changes slightly. Move the romantic associates and maube even family members to a section on the actual page under relationships. It allows for more detail on each relationship and makes the stats boxes smaller and tidier.
i did one on john crichton ... if you think its a good idea i will be happy to change all of them over. -- User:RavagingGlory
- I agree. Especially in Crichton's case, family and relationships really do lengthen that box. Mistrx75 06:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
I can be on board for that. I imagine it would streamline the infobox. It also makes sense because often with many characters, little or nothing is kown for these categories. I'll change the manual of style, but keep the template as is. We can all transition the entries over as soon as possible. --FrellingFahrbot 18:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
ALSO... Lets move this discussion over to the Manual of Style discussion section! I'll migrate the content in a moment and leave the original here. All users can find the continuing discussion at Talk:Manual of Style. --FrellingFahrbot 18:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to state my belief that the character articles and section headings with the exception of sections such as "Background Info" should stay away from the current style of "Pre-Show", "Season X" format as I think this unneccessarily breaks the in-universe Point of View. A quick look at the Memory Alpha wiki and the Babylon Project Wiki seems to show that their character headings aren't based on seasons. I understand that each wiki will have its own policies. I just think that we should seriously considering a better way to divide character articles when neccessary, and I believe those two wikis may give us some ideas on how we could do so without breaking the in-universe Point of View for the headings. LiveLongandProsper (talk) 17:00, May 3, 2014 (UTC)
Citing Authors/sources
We need to work on this. There is a template that they use in the central wikipedia, but I don't have time right now to determine that. My suggestion is that we defer to these formats and have citation links from individual sections to a "sources" subtopic. In the case of the verbatim copying of episode summaries, as these might eventually be edited or change, I think it is important that we keep the citation, but have is specifically noted that "original summary written by X at Y.com" to give credit where credit is due without tying our hands for further development/editing. Thoughts? Comments? -FrellingFahrbot 17:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with that. Other than the episode summaries, do you have any ideas on what else needs to be cited? Basically everything or just information we take from other sources? Mistrx75 04:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think we only need to do this when there is a large amount of text, such as the episode summaries, otherwise I would say its fair use and all previous sumbissions to the FEP in its previous incarnations are understood to fall under our basic control to do with as we see fit. FrellingFahrbot 12:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)