Heyo! I wasn't exactly sure of where to post this, but I guess General Discussion is as good as any. So, I was wondering if we should perhaps fix up the character pages on the wiki. I feel like the whole biography part varies from different page. In Levana's page, the biography is grouped into history, cinder, scarlet, cress, and fairest, but in Thorne's, it's grouped into Early Life and Recent Activities. I don't know which format the wiki members prefer, so I'm not sure to change anything. I'd also like to mention that in Cinder's character page, history only has one sub-category, so I don't feel like it's necessary to make a whole category devoted to only one paragraph.
Should we have a set format for character pages? Personally, I like the format Levana's has, but I want to know your opinions too.
I've actually asked this question to User:Ohmystars at Thread:7092, you can read the example I've given, I did originally fixed Cinder's page to what's similar to Thorne's (http://lunarchronicles.wikia.com/wiki/Cinder_(character)?oldid=14121 ), but you changed it back to using book as subsections. Obviously our preference is different (you like the out of universe style, while I like the in-universe style) (and there's nothing wrong with different opinions), which is why I asked the admin.
In-universe style can still be informative if using proper citation, you'd still be able to know what book or even chapter the events you are reading is from, IF/when the editor remembers to appropriately reference the material.
Beeper100 wrote: Yep. Honestly though, I don't care too much if it's in/out-universe, but I really want to know if we should change all character pages to in/out instead of having a mix between the two.
Article should be written as if the universe of The Lunar Chronicles series was the real world. Chapters and books should not be referred to in a sentence, and characters should not be treated as fictional constructs. These articles include all character, location, object, event etc. articles – all articles not in the real world category.
I had been trying to convert them more fitting to in-universe article according to the policy of this wiki when I had still been editing; and honestly, the articles hadn't been doing bad, just that the tenses were sometimes wrong. You were right that before, when it was "history" instead of "biography", there was only a big chunk of information, and then "recent event"; I saw the flaw in it so I changed it by breaking down into sections with I least what I thought a major monumental point of events, and then someone, probably not just you, then go turning those sections into book names, a very breakaway from MOS move.
If you want an indefinite answer, you can also try asking User:Ohmystars, let her know that this in fact is a problem.
Ah, I read through the community guide before, but this part I hadn't thought in depth about. And, apologizing for my wording, I meant I don't care if the wiki members wanted to change how the format is supposed to be.