Editing Talk:John-117
From Halopedia, the Halo wiki
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Archived|multi=Archives<br />[[/Archive 1|1]] • [[/Archive 2|2]] • [[/Archive 3|3]] • [[/Archive 4|4]] • [[/Archive 5|5]]}} | {{Archived|multi=Archives<br />[[/Archive 1|1]] • [[/Archive 2|2]] • [[/Archive 3|3]] • [[/Archive 4|4]] • [[/Archive 5|5]]}} | ||
==Update== | ==Update== | ||
Line 126: | Line 123: | ||
(Reset indent again) Tabs (or Tabber) is not a suitable solution for an article as it is designed for snippet content. It wouldn't really resolve the length/trimming issue as readers would still be bombarded with a overdetailed content. Furthermore, Tabs would be unusable once it goes beyond five tabs (especially in Mobile theme where it looks squashed and ugly). We've tried it in the past with some articles (I believe it's either MJOLNIR or some related article to MJOLNIR... can't remember which one). The end result was that it was squished and inaccessible to general users, not to mention ugly. Granted, Tabs now works better in Mobile theme now than it did a few years back but it still wouldn't be a suitable solution for overdetailed articles once it goes beyond five tabs or so. | (Reset indent again) Tabs (or Tabber) is not a suitable solution for an article as it is designed for snippet content. It wouldn't really resolve the length/trimming issue as readers would still be bombarded with a overdetailed content. Furthermore, Tabs would be unusable once it goes beyond five tabs (especially in Mobile theme where it looks squashed and ugly). We've tried it in the past with some articles (I believe it's either MJOLNIR or some related article to MJOLNIR... can't remember which one). The end result was that it was squished and inaccessible to general users, not to mention ugly. Granted, Tabs now works better in Mobile theme now than it did a few years back but it still wouldn't be a suitable solution for overdetailed articles once it goes beyond five tabs or so. | ||
{{Article | {{Article Quote|Splitting up the article into, say "John-117/ Early Life", "John-117/Human-Covenant War" and "John-117/Post-War" would simply involve taking the text you've wrote and placing it across those pages, with the main John-117 page giving brief overviews of those subjects and links to the more in-depth articles for those who want to read it.}} | ||
The current solution that works best to my mind would be what Spartacus and BaconShelf proposed: the biographical content would be relocated to a subpage or an article of its own. I prefer the latter as it follows Wikipedia's presentation style and we could use this as a precedent for future articles with overdetailed content. It would also help to [[Halopedia:Manual_of_Style#Article_focus_and_scope|balance the details out and put some focus back]] into the article (funnily enough, John-117 was used as an example of a concise article when we updated the MoS in 2015). Furthermore, it will encourage editors such as TheEld to introduce more biographical-style content into the wiki for other fleshed out characters. If written well, it could be a Featured Article on its own. There's quite a number of pros over cons for going down this route, so I believe this would be a great solution to implement.— <span style="font-size:14px; font-family:Arial;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 22:20, 5 February 2019 (EST) | The current solution that works best to my mind would be what Spartacus and BaconShelf proposed: the biographical content would be relocated to a subpage or an article of its own. I prefer the latter as it follows Wikipedia's presentation style and we could use this as a precedent for future articles with overdetailed content. It would also help to [[Halopedia:Manual_of_Style#Article_focus_and_scope|balance the details out and put some focus back]] into the article (funnily enough, John-117 was used as an example of a concise article when we updated the MoS in 2015). Furthermore, it will encourage editors such as TheEld to introduce more biographical-style content into the wiki for other fleshed out characters. If written well, it could be a Featured Article on its own. There's quite a number of pros over cons for going down this route, so I believe this would be a great solution to implement.— <span style="font-size:14px; font-family:Arial;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 22:20, 5 February 2019 (EST) | ||
Line 143: | Line 140: | ||
''(reset indent)'' As D9328 mentioned, there's very little info on John's life ''outside'' of his military career, so I'm questioning if "Military career of John-117" would be the best option for the detailed side article. What if there was just one detailed biography under a title like "Biography of John-117"? This would also make it easier to use the same format for other pages and consequently, keep track other such pages should they become necessary later on (a category for them would be useful as well). I'm aware an overall biography page would also run into the issue of being extremely long, but at least users would know what they were in for (unlike here, where the length and level of detail makes reading the biography an intimidating task; someone looking to learn more about John's life doesn't necessarily need to know what exact type of weapon and number of magazines he was carrying at any given time). --[[User:Tacitus|Tacitus]] ([[User talk:Tacitus|talk]]) 06:24, 7 February 2019 (EST) | ''(reset indent)'' As D9328 mentioned, there's very little info on John's life ''outside'' of his military career, so I'm questioning if "Military career of John-117" would be the best option for the detailed side article. What if there was just one detailed biography under a title like "Biography of John-117"? This would also make it easier to use the same format for other pages and consequently, keep track other such pages should they become necessary later on (a category for them would be useful as well). I'm aware an overall biography page would also run into the issue of being extremely long, but at least users would know what they were in for (unlike here, where the length and level of detail makes reading the biography an intimidating task; someone looking to learn more about John's life doesn't necessarily need to know what exact type of weapon and number of magazines he was carrying at any given time). --[[User:Tacitus|Tacitus]] ([[User talk:Tacitus|talk]]) 06:24, 7 February 2019 (EST) | ||
:No issues with a biography page. We could place it as a subpage (i.e. John-117/Biography), just like how we manage with the weapons and levels articles (e.g. the gameplay/walkthrough content have been moved to their respective weapons and levels articles' subpage). We could also insert a header/banner at the top of the page to inform readers that it is a biographical article and that the encyclopedic version is available in a given link. This would be a fine addition to our Layout | :No issues with a biography page. We could place it as a subpage (i.e. John-117/Biography), just like how we manage with the weapons and levels articles (e.g. the gameplay/walkthrough content have been moved to their respective weapons and levels articles' subpage). We could also insert a header/banner at the top of the page to inform readers that it is a biographical article and that the encyclopedic version is available in a given link. This would be a fine addition to our Layout Guide as well as to the Manual of Style. — <span style="font-size:14px; font-family:Arial;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 10:35, 7 February 2019 (EST) | ||
==Pending the current reverts 15/04/2019== | ==Pending the current reverts 15/04/2019== | ||
Line 153: | Line 150: | ||
::Ok I added that back in from the prologue, yep it was an accident cause I thought I moved stuff around in a second edit (It didnt save my second edit wah).-[[User:CIA391|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391|talk]]) 13:36, April 15, 2019 (EDT) | ::Ok I added that back in from the prologue, yep it was an accident cause I thought I moved stuff around in a second edit (It didnt save my second edit wah).-[[User:CIA391|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391|talk]]) 13:36, April 15, 2019 (EDT) | ||