Difference between revisions of "Category talk:References"
Revision as of 12:42, 22 January 2007
I'm noticing that the pages in the References category have an article section structure that widely varies. Can we come to a consensus on the "proper" layout of the articles, so I can go through and standardize them? --Orne 10:09, 22 January 2007 (EST)
|Introduction Information||Short description|
|About||In-depth description of the reference (in real-world perspective), including real world examples if necessary|
|References in Heroes||Breakdown of the referenced material (in Heroes perspective), using bulleted list|
|Gallery||Images (inline images if 1 or 2, Gallery if 3 or more)|
- "Notes" and "Trivia" (in that order) should go after "About"/"References", and before the "Gallery", so it's consistent with the rest of the site. I also wouldn't get too rigid with sticking strictly to those headings - for instance, Soma has a "Real-World References" heading, which should probably stay (though it could be incorporated into the "About" section, I guess). Soma also would seem kind of silly to have a "References in Heroes" section, since a gallery suffices. But that's just my opinion, and just an example of reasons not to box ourselves in too much. Also, I don't know that a bulleted list is best for all references. For instance, AA meeting works better as a narrative, and so do the Suicide references, in my opinion.
- In the words of a certain TV-series creator. "Go to town". -- Cuardin 13:42, 22 January 2007 (EST)