No :( I'm not reading anything at the moment, which is very unusual. The last fiction I read was Children of Time by Adrian Tchaikovsky. I seem to be completely occupied with university work and TV - and that's not good.
I'm looking at the page for "The Riddle of the Sphinx" and the plot summary seems to have many holes. Also the plot isn't in the order that it happens in the episodes (as it is on other episode pages I've seen), but it's in order of each storyline. Is there a preferred method of presenting the summary?
The summary for this episode, unlike any other, used the official synopsis as a starting point. It's end of year exams for me at the moment, and i am more than slightly pressed for time. So i took the shortcut of using the supplied synopsis, which meant there were holes, and at least one (major?) inconsistency (originating in the hbo synopsis) which our TenCents picked up.
The usual method is to:
Summarise each scene as it appears in the episode. This gives an accurate account but can be "bitty", due to short scenes.
Smooth it out - whilst retaining the overall order of the episode. For each "thread" in the episode (A thread is one of the story lines that run through an episode. For instance, if Logan and William appear together mostly we call that a thread) the scenes for that thread are joined together - but not to the extent that the flow is mucked up.
I'm pleased you completed the section. I'm not interested in doing everything myself or in maintaining an iron control over detail. A fan wiki is too much work for one person and editors edit best when they are not rigidly controlled. So, please jump in where you see a need.
Will do. I used to do tons of episode summaries over on the Disney wiki, but I've recently gotten away from doing this. I can help with this season for sure. Is the way I left the page for last week's episode comparable to this wiki's general standard or should I do anything different?
Last week's summary fits in nicely with the wiki's plot section style. Present tense, no assumptions, interpretations, or theories. I'm learning about how to look after a larger, busier, wiki and how that's not so much about doing all of the editing myself, but mostly about the wiki's structure, removing spam and speculation, and encouraging folk like yourself. So bear with me please.
Something for us both to think about, and the other editor who's done summaries so far this season, is a comment on last week's summary. I wonder if there's a need for "overview summary" as well one that documents everything that happened.
The comment praised the plot section for how easy it was to understand. It's just in the article's comments and was made before the section was completed - when it was based on HBO's very simple synopsis.
What do you think? Would an overview summary be a useful addition?
By overview do you mean just like a 2 to 3 sentence summary of each main storyline? If so, I think that would be very helpful. I wouldn't consider myself to be the best at terse summaries (as my inclination is to summarize every little thing that happens), but I can write up a little something and see if you think it works. I can start with "The Riddle of the Sphinx".
If you look in the plot section of Riddle, at the top you'll see a link to the official synopsis, which is pretty much what I mean. We could write our own version of that x or just use theirs. As long as we credit it to them there shouldn't be a problem.
Thanks! Everything is in its proper place timeline wise, but the time periods for Seasons 1 and 2 are clearly marked. I'm planning to add some images to illustrate it better and clean up the linking, as well as keeping it updated through the rest of the season.
I understand that we've basically received confirmation that Grace and Emily are the same character, but it seems odd to simply leave the Grace page up with all of the info just with a message at the top saying they're the same character. Wouldn't it make more sense to just have the Grace page automatically redirect to Emily, like how William automatically redirects to Man in Black?
Emily page is fine, and if it's not you can just add things.
There's really no point in preserving the comments, I don't think there needs to be any sentimentality to them or the original page. Also if you're gonna do a redirect you also need to blank the page, there's no reason to keep any of the info, the link Grace still automatically goes to the Grace page.
I'm sorry, it's just if you have an identical page, and we already know they're the same character, I don't see any reason to want to keep the original page. The William page was blanked and made a redirect a while ago and all links to just William automatically go to Man in Black, there's no info on the original page from when people thought they were separate characters.
Please don't think that your comments and suggestions are unwelcome - there's more than enough activity here to require more local admins, esp those who can disagree with each other without it becoming an argument. So your comments are particularly welcome.
so I believe that Clementine (old/current) is gonna have a much bigger role this season and I don't think we are going to ever see the "new" Ersatz-Clementine again. As Bernard has referred to her as Clementine I think it would be nice to seperate the pages into Clementine Pennyfeather and Clementine Pennyfeather (ersatz) just to make it less confusing?
I would be willing to separate both pages but wanted to get your approval first.
I think that first of all we should lose the word "ersatz", which I had to look up, and use "new", or "replacement" instead. I'd suggest "new" rather than replacement, to fit in with Peter Abernathy.
I have to admit to not looking at Clementine's page for a while, so I wasn't aware of how it had developed - and it is a bit confusing and inconsistent. It seems to imply, for instance, that the version of Clementine played by Lilly Simmons was in The Riddle of the Sphinx, and that Sarafyan's Clementine hasn't been seen since the Season 1 finale.
So yes, the page does need sorting. Would you like to do that?
My starting point is that it should be a single article. Bear with me. The narrative of Peter Abernathy, for instance, has been filled by two hosts but, just like Clementine, we're only really interested in one - Herthum's version.
We're not really interested in the role of the rancher now, if the park were operating normally the role would played by the new Peter - but the tv show is following (apparently) the robot revolution and not the narrative loops surrounding the Abernathy ranch. As far as I remember, New Peter hasn't been seen for some time now.
I don't think either New Peter or New Clementine warrant their own pages. At the moment when, in the show, a new host takes over a role we follow the old one. The new host isn't getting a big role in either case.
This is the right thing to do btw, your first reaction on seeing a big change that you think needs to be made -- was to talk it through. Thank you, please keep on doing that.
Hi! I just noticed that the wiki has two articles for the Mariposa bartender: Bartender and Bartender (The Original). Should they be merged together like the Peter Abernathy and Walter articles? Or is it worth thinking about creating separate articles for characters played by multiple hosts (e.g. split Walter into Old Walter and New Walter)?
I've seen that you replaced the cast lists in Season 2 with the template, but due to this some of the new main cast members aren't listed anymore in the episode pages (Angela Sarafyan in episodes 2 and 3, Clifton Collins Jr. in episode 2 and Katja Herbers in episode 3). Can we add their names to the template?