Talk:Main Page

From TemeraireWiki
Revision as of 10:23, 12 January 2007 by Andrew (talk | contribs) (Questions to consider)

Jump to: navigation, search

As you can tell, we're in the very early stages here! There is a template for dragons, thanks to Lydia -- see the Maximus page for an example of how to use it. I'll be duplicating it for the humans asap.

For the moment, feel free to add pages as you like -- make sure you put [[category:A-Z]] on every page, in addition to any other category.

I'm looking for an outside place we can upload images to -- you are welcome to link to anything in the Gallery section on in the meantime.

-- whitearrow 21:15, 14 September 2006 (PDT)

More Templates!

There are now templates for People, Dragons, and Dragon Species. Have a look at Category:Templates, and for usage, look at the source on Temeraire, William Laurence and Regal Copper.

Sekrit to Lydia -- the way to keep Category:Templates off the pages that use the templates is to put this code on the template page:

<noinclude> [[Category:Templates]] </noinclude>

--whitearrow 12:30, 15 September 2006 (PDT)


I've started a page here for conventions for this wiki -- let's talk about any specifics over there.

--whitearrow 11:40, 19 September 2006 (PDT)

French names & such

I've moved Amitié to Amite -- let's bail on the accented characters for wiki purposes. It's only going to get worse with the Pecheurs and such, and either having to remember the alt-character or copying and pasting all the time is hereby deemed a pain :)

-whitearrow 19:08, 20 September 2006 (PDT)

Alphabetical listings of names

Aha! To have characters sort in the category pages by last names, enter the categories like so:

[[Category:A-Z|Laurence, William]]

(You have to include this for each relevant category in the article.)

The listing will still show up as "William Laurence" but it will appear under L instead of W.

(BTW to add signature and timestamp to your Talk posts, it's a 4 tildes (~). I use a dash first, so like so to produce my sig line below: -~~~~

"Life's a dance, you learn as you go" -- just like wikicode :)

-whitearrow 14:26, 22 September 2006 (PDT)

Questions to consider

One thing we need to sort out fairly quickly is the question of page references. I'd prefer to avoid them as much as possible -- for one thing, there are already at least three printed editions of the books out there, not to mention the numerous digital ones, and pagination is going to differ in each.

I'd rather paraphrase than use direct quotes, but if a direct quote is, on rare occasion, needed, we can use a chapter reference rather than page. It's less specific, but at least it will be accurate for all present and future editions.

For another thing, I'd rather take a "historical" approach, rather than a literary one... by that I mean treat this Wiki as if we're writing about real people, places and events, rather than literary characters. So instead of "character x died in ToJ" -- character x died in an engagement over the Channel with the French in early 1806" or whatever.

In that same vein, let's use past tense, both for consistency and to keep the "historical" feeling.

Comments? These aren't alterations that need to be made right away; we can edit things as we go.


I'm an English major so I'm obviously the one taking the literary approach here. I've had it drilled into my head that quoting or paraphrasing without a citation is plagiarism so I'm kind of iffy on that. And as you can see from all the page references I made over the weekend, I'm a big fan. I just thought people would want to be able to go see for themselves, especially if there is more information contained therein that we're not saying.

I'm not adverse to chapter references if you'd rather though. Strangerface 13:53, 25 September 2006 (PDT)

I like the "historical" approach more because I find it more immediate, and that it immerses you in the world. But I still think we need to use past tense verbs -- basically, the conceit is we're writing about things that have already happened.

As much as possible, I'd prefer not to do references at all, and keep quotes to an absolute, utter minimum, when there's just no other way to say something, which I think will be rare. So I don't think there's anything wrong with physical descriptions, say, being paraphrased -- there are only so many ways to say someone is tall with dark hair :) and I don't think any reference is necessary for that kind of thing.

Otherwise, where do we draw the line? Do we need references for everything? That's kind of a nightmare, and if something like the Encyclopedia of Arda (LotR) can do without them, I think we can too. If an issue comes up about whether something is correct, I think the Talk pages are a perfect place to discuss, list references, and see where everybody is coming from. I understand the English-major tendency, and I share it to a large degree, but I think we want to keep this accurate -- but at the same time fun, and something people want to work on.

I think, when references are necessary, it will have to be chapters, unless there's some way to reconcile the page number problem in all the different editions, and I don't think there is.


We seem to be at an impasse then. The only other two encyclopedia type sites I've worked with are and I was actually thinking, since you mentioned it, it would ultimately be better to do the references similarly to the way HP Lexicon does, with a chapter date since editions change.

But I was keeping page numbers on the Temeraire crew page so I could go back and add individual pages for them later.

Strangerface 18:49, 25 September 2006 (PDT)

I'm not sure what to say, then -- I just feel like requiring that would be too cumbersome, and having it in some places and not others is just inconsistent and unhelpful. I have no problem in whipping out references on a Talk page if something is disputed, but having them all over the place... I'd rather not.

I'm not going to go through and massively delete them, for now, especially if you find it helpful in developing other content, but in the medium-long term, I'd like to see them diminish. Notes can be kept indefinitely as entries on Talk pages, especially for details that might be hard to find -- does that help address your concerns?


Are there going to be other people helping with the site? Maybe other opinions would be helpful?

It's just, when you emailed me about this project, one of the reasons I thought it'd be a great idea was because when I was when disucssing in a fandom or writing fanfic, I'm always struggling to find where I saw information. And I use those other sites you mentioned as an index as well as a referesher if I forget who people are. But that's just my approach, I can see that you want something different now. And I understand what you're saying about referencing everything, because at some point people ought to just pick up the books themselves. Perhaps if, in our ever expanding timeline section, we kept like a summary of what happens in each chapter, so people would know where to find things. And then we could keep the references out of the entires unless we're quoting directly? Strangerface 20:04, 25 September 2006 (PDT)

I like the idea of some reference to where the information comes from. Taking on board the different editions issue, perhaps book and chapter references is the way to go. I know that I can't remember having read anything about the Japanese water projecting dragon except on the internet, and everytime I do, I wonder where it is and think about re-reading looking for it specifically. --Andrew 02:14, 12 January 2007 (PST)


I changed both the category and template for "Dragon Species" to "Dragon Breeds," which is more accurate. The template is template:DragonBreeds and category is Dragon Breeds.


A plea for proper attribution

As a regular Wikipedian, I would obviously like to have everything properly attributed. As to the question of pages vs chapters, I haven't seen the US editions, but it would surprise me if the pagination were to prove identical; this would also apply to different editions from the same country. If the books are translated into other languages this difficulty would obviously increase. I would therefore prefer to use chapter references.

If it were possible to use numbered paragraphs, that would be optimal, but there's such a thing as taking a good idea too far ;-)

On the question of US vs UK editions, I would make a plea that all information from Black Powder War be clearly demarcated, since this book hasn't yet been published here in the UK.

If I can be of any assistance with the workings of a wiki, please let me know. I hope to be able to look in fairly regularly, although I only own the first book so far, so my contributions are likely to be more in the way of formatting and tidying up.

If anybody would like to help me keep the appropriate articles on Wikipedia up-to-date, that would be great: just be aware that those would require far less detail than here ;-) HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 07:26, 14 December 2006 (PST)

Phil, I appreciate the sentiment, but as our approach is historical, rather than literary, it raises two problems -- one is of the differing versions and pagination (different editions in the US, UK and Australia, the omnibus of books 1-3, and at least three electronic editions) and the other is the way it would interrupt the narrative type of encyclopedia entries we are striving for to include constant references. Also, at this point, going back and attempting to track down every reference would be incredibly time consuming.

We've been using the Talk pages for obscure references and such, and explanations of information that's been deduced from numerous sources (e.g., Laurence's age) -- I can't really see a better way to handle it. If you have suggestions, they're more than welcome. - whitearrow 19:32, 17 December 2006 (PST)

Black Powder war has now been released in the UK, but I definately think the issue arrises with info on book 4. See Spoiler section below. There may again be issues that pop up with US, UK release dates. Perhaps the main page warning could mention the difference between US and UK pub dates?--Andrew 02:22, 12 January 2007 (PST)

Interwiki link templates

{{Wikipedia}}, {{Wikimedia}}, {{Meta}} and {{Wiktionary}} -- to simplify links to other wikis. Use a | after the name of the template to indicate your target page.

Description You type You get
Interwiki link to Wikipedia {{Wikipedia|Napoleon}}
[[[4]|   ]]
Interwiki link to Metawiki {{Meta|Help:Categories}}
[[[5]|   ]]
Interwiki link to Mediawiki {{Mediawiki|Manual:FAQ}}
[[[6]|   ]]
Interwiki link to Wiktionary

(shows target word only)


I figured the dictionary link was most likely to be used in text, while the others are for "External Link" sections or metapages, and included the target word only. And if you don't like this method, the manual external link method will still work.


I know that as the wiki is based on books that people may not have read, avoiding spoilers for every potential viewer is all but impossible. One thing I would like to suggest though is removing the spoilers that have been posted for book 4. Whether these come from information elsewhere on the web, or from reading's taken from the next unpublished book, they can be quite distressing if you didn't want to see it. And even just seeing the spoiler warning can tell you plenty.

Is it possible to keep the information on the wiki soley to the published work? Backing out information like that on Obversaria? Another point worth noting is that the warning on the Main Page does not let you know there are potential spoilers for book 4.--Andrew 02:08, 12 January 2007 (PST)