Difference between revisions of "Template talk:InfoBoxNovel"
Sarna News
(Agree.) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
When I wrote the article about [[Shrapnel]] I used the InfoBoxBook, although I do not know where I took it from. What I am saying is that while your template looks better, something like it is already being used on this wiki. We should seek to use one standard format. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:11, 4 August 2008 (CDT) | When I wrote the article about [[Shrapnel]] I used the InfoBoxBook, although I do not know where I took it from. What I am saying is that while your template looks better, something like it is already being used on this wiki. We should seek to use one standard format. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 07:11, 4 August 2008 (CDT) | ||
:I spoke with [[User:Revanche|Revanche]] about this, and the reason for creating a new template for novels is that InfoBoxBook doesn't offer the best information. "Production Code", "Additional Writing", and "Product Development" aren't really useful, and novel's rarely have an illustrator, but rather a cover artist. In addition there's no chronological information, such as to what series the book belongs. Since there's a solid division between the novels and any "crunch" data (manuals, field books, etc.) it makes sense to create a new template. Revanche agreed. If you think it should be handled differently you should probably speak with him since he's the Admin. Thanks. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 16:32, 4 August 2008 (CDT) | :I spoke with [[User:Revanche|Revanche]] about this, and the reason for creating a new template for novels is that InfoBoxBook doesn't offer the best information. "Production Code", "Additional Writing", and "Product Development" aren't really useful, and novel's rarely have an illustrator, but rather a cover artist. In addition there's no chronological information, such as to what series the book belongs. Since there's a solid division between the novels and any "crunch" data (manuals, field books, etc.) it makes sense to create a new template. Revanche agreed. If you think it should be handled differently you should probably speak with him since he's the Admin. Thanks. --[[User:Ebakunin|Ebakunin]] 16:32, 4 August 2008 (CDT) | ||
| + | ::I was unaware of you discussing this with Revance. The way you explain it makes sense, so just go ahead! [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 16:53, 4 August 2008 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 17:53, 4 August 2008
InfoBoxBook
When I wrote the article about Shrapnel I used the InfoBoxBook, although I do not know where I took it from. What I am saying is that while your template looks better, something like it is already being used on this wiki. We should seek to use one standard format. Frabby 07:11, 4 August 2008 (CDT)
- I spoke with Revanche about this, and the reason for creating a new template for novels is that InfoBoxBook doesn't offer the best information. "Production Code", "Additional Writing", and "Product Development" aren't really useful, and novel's rarely have an illustrator, but rather a cover artist. In addition there's no chronological information, such as to what series the book belongs. Since there's a solid division between the novels and any "crunch" data (manuals, field books, etc.) it makes sense to create a new template. Revanche agreed. If you think it should be handled differently you should probably speak with him since he's the Admin. Thanks. --Ebakunin 16:32, 4 August 2008 (CDT)
- I was unaware of you discussing this with Revance. The way you explain it makes sense, so just go ahead! Frabby 16:53, 4 August 2008 (CDT)