Proper referencing of episodesEdit
The references I made to episodes in the style (XL5:Hypnotic Sphere) have been changed to remove the XL5 prefix. I think we should keep it and use the (Series Name:Episode Name) convention for refering to episodes everywhere. Although obviously the XL5 prefix is redundant on the XL5 page, I think keep itfor consistency. The use of the (Series:Episode) format is particularly important on this wiki because when writing articles about real people/events it is likley that authors will refer to source material from more than one of the Gerry Anderson Series.
What are people's thoughts?
- You know what - you're probably right. As there are various series here on this wikia someone could get a bit confused if they saw a combined list of all episodes. Ok - I'll restore those prefixes back but without using links. Then as far as all series are concerned we'll be adding those prefixes without links. The only exeption would be if we wanted to reffer to another series. What do you say? ;)
BTW: I'll start rebuilding the help section so it is shorter and easier to search through. Do you have any ideas for the guidelines? For example some rules about canon sources etc.
Jamjumetley 20:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me.
- As far as canon sources etc are concerned I see no reason why the wiki shouldn't allow the inclusion of anything as long as it is a Gery Anderson original or a credits Gerry Anderson with a "based on" or "licenced by" credit of some sort. For instance it seems sensible to allow artices about Thunderbirds 2086 or licenced novels, which are "non-canon" sources.
I think the only "rule" required is that they are marked as non cannon by placing them in a non-canon category or under a non-canon heading, where they are subsections of articles containing canon material; that way if the wiki did ever grow to the point that people wanted to split the canon and non-canon into seperate wikis or somthing (as was done with Memory-Alpha, the Star Trek wiki) it would be fairly easy to do so, by running some SQL searches on the wiki database.
Grabthar 23:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- That's good we understand each other ;) I think what you're proposing is OK. But I'm not really sure what to do with the 2004 Thunderbirds film and New Captain Scarlet. How should we treat it? There is a lot of inconsistencies with the originals. As you said - we will include them in the encyclopedia but the question remains wether it is a canon or not. Gerry Anderson wasn't involved in Thunderbirds movie at all (not a canon then) whereas Captain Scarlet is his production (what is this one?).
- BTW - My suggestion is that episodes are listed in a separate article and linked to the "base" series article. What do you think?
- Jamjumetley 01:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. I think it's just a case of acknowledging that we are dealing with multiple canons and naming/categorising articles appropriatly. I've tried to start a convention by creating links for the various Thunderbird craft with the convention: Thunderbird 1 for Supermarionation Thunderbird, Thunderbird 1 (film) for the 2004 film version and Thunderbird 1 (2086) for the Thunderbirds 2086 Thunderbird. If we keep to naming conventions like that and maintain disambiguation pages it should work ok. So in that schema Cloudbase would have two articles perhaps Cloudbase for the original and Cloudbase (NCS) for New Captain Scarlet?
- A good example of this sort of implementation is Battlestar Wiki , which deals with the orignial Battlestar Galactica, Galactica 1980 and the Re-imagined version; each of those series features vessels, characters, locations etc with the same names, but different details; the same problem we have with Captain Scarlet vs New Captain Scarlet. They use (TOS), (1980) and (RDM) suffixes to denote which series an article pertains to. I think if we learn from that example we will be on the right track, although as illustrated by my example I think we can use no suffix can indicate the original Supermarionation version.
- What are your thoughts?
- Wherever you think the episode list should go is fine; my intention in creating an episode list was to try and facilitate writing of new articles by providing lots of "red links" for people to fill in, it can fill that function wherever it is.
- Grabthar 02:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Your ideas regarding multiple articles on one subject sounds fine to me. As for the episodes I had some second thoughts. Maybe it should stay in the main article. All in all there aren't too many episodes (39 at most I think) so there won't be too much scrolling through the page. It's not like in star trek where there are 7 seasons of the series. I'll try to think of some template that would unify the look of episode lists in every series. I would like to hear your opinion on the look. Should there be simple tables or should I think of some round corners?
188.8.131.52 09:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)