Post by kate on Oct 26, 2009 19:22:00 GMT
Good work on the Decget page Lia! 
It's annoying though because, even though it's a very well set-up and written page, and it would be great by anyone else's standards, I think some of the stuff might be taken down as it is, because they don't seem to want anything more than a teeny bit of summary (500 to 100 words, so about half of that I reckon) unless it's supported by anything about the media attention it might have had...
Apparently this is what the Wikipedia soap project thinks is a good example of an article:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Fowler
So it has to have things that relate to how the public has viewed a storyline, rather than a storyline in and of itself.
Annoyingly though, I get the feeling that some people don't seem to think our characters are as earthshatteringly 'important' as a character like Pauline Fowler's (no offence to her or Eastenders, but God knows why), so I think we're probably going to be fighting an uphill battle with this on some counts. But Decget have actually had a lot of media stuff that can be included, so that should be safe...
ETA:
This is what a few people have directed me to now, and I really do think we have to stick to it or you end up seeing stuff you've done deleted by someknow-all official type (as I had happen to me myself before 
):
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Soap_Operas#Character_articles
This is basically the important bit:
The article should not be used for a collection of storyline trivia about the character. As a rule of thumb, only those events which were significant enough to have been written about in third-party sources should be included.Remember that we are here to create an encyclopedia, not to provide a comprehensive guide to soap opera storylines. Wherever possible, try to discuss the character in "real world" context: Why are they important to non-fans, how are they affecting modern culture, what have they done that is historic in a real-world context. If a detail is only interesting to those who watch the show, it is probably not worth including in the Wikipedia article.
To be honest, I'm a bit worried they might say Decget isn't big enough to qualify as big enough for a supercouple page, according to the criteria they have for that, because as far as I can remember they haven't actually had any non-soap press saying as much.
That makes me angry. Tis a minefield, isn't it?
We can appreciate it as it is for now though, I guess ...until someone sticks an oar in, which unfortunately I imagine they will. 
It's annoying though because, even though it's a very well set-up and written page, and it would be great by anyone else's standards, I think some of the stuff might be taken down as it is, because they don't seem to want anything more than a teeny bit of summary (500 to 100 words, so about half of that I reckon) unless it's supported by anything about the media attention it might have had...
Apparently this is what the Wikipedia soap project thinks is a good example of an article:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Fowler
So it has to have things that relate to how the public has viewed a storyline, rather than a storyline in and of itself.
Annoyingly though, I get the feeling that some people don't seem to think our characters are as earthshatteringly 'important' as a character like Pauline Fowler's (no offence to her or Eastenders, but God knows why), so I think we're probably going to be fighting an uphill battle with this on some counts. But Decget have actually had a lot of media stuff that can be included, so that should be safe...
ETA:
This is what a few people have directed me to now, and I really do think we have to stick to it or you end up seeing stuff you've done deleted by some
):en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Soap_Operas#Character_articles
This is basically the important bit:
The article should not be used for a collection of storyline trivia about the character. As a rule of thumb, only those events which were significant enough to have been written about in third-party sources should be included.Remember that we are here to create an encyclopedia, not to provide a comprehensive guide to soap opera storylines. Wherever possible, try to discuss the character in "real world" context: Why are they important to non-fans, how are they affecting modern culture, what have they done that is historic in a real-world context. If a detail is only interesting to those who watch the show, it is probably not worth including in the Wikipedia article.
To be honest, I'm a bit worried they might say Decget isn't big enough to qualify as big enough for a supercouple page, according to the criteria they have for that, because as far as I can remember they haven't actually had any non-soap press saying as much.
That makes me angry. Tis a minefield, isn't it?We can appreciate it as it is for now though, I guess
...until someone sticks an oar in, which unfortunately I imagine they will. 
