Template talk:Fictionlist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Improvements needed

The template speaks too much. The text is well and good – it contains constructive advices, but they should reside in a policy-like method page. It may be enough to say that "details of fiction disturb the fact article and they should be moved to a trivia section for cleanup and new article creation".

The template should also possibly link to the talk page for further editor discussion? Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 12:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It says a lot in an effort to help people who have no real experience with these things understand.

Talk page wouldn't be harmful, but of course any tag that people dispute can and shold be discussed on the talk page so a link should be unnecessary.... except, again, perhaps for the really inexperienced. It's typically the twelve year old kids who add most of the nonsense being tagged here. DreamGuy 18:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see – that is a valid reason, but then maybe the language should be unacademized (such as f.ex. "fictional references" ⇒ "references to fiction", "for an encylopedic and academic approach" ⇒ "for an encyclopedia"), so that it's language is more straightforward to read – my first language is Swedish, but the same phenomenon of "too academic" exist in Swedish too (called "substantiverat" - "noun-ized"). Maybe we can consider a reformulation? The talk page link may be optional. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 06:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] change of wording

"for an encylopedic and academic approach" WP is a general encyclopedia, not an academic work, and academic approaches to topics are not necesaariy suitable. I suggest changing to just "for an encyclopedic approach" 04:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Go for it.--Father Goose 05:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC)