More actions
Spencerian (talk | contribs) →What's the difference?: +comment |
Spencerian (talk | contribs) m +comment |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Right now we have {{tl|fandom}} and {{tl|non-canon}}, which are used somewhat interchangeably. {{tl|Fandom}} is used 6 times, whereas {{tl|non-canon}} is used only once. What exactly is the difference between these two templates? If they are the same, one of them should be deleted. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]] 14:51, 4 March 2007 (CST) | Right now we have {{tl|fandom}} and {{tl|non-canon}}, which are used somewhat interchangeably. {{tl|Fandom}} is used 6 times, whereas {{tl|non-canon}} is used only once. What exactly is the difference between these two templates? If they are the same, one of them should be deleted. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]] 14:51, 4 March 2007 (CST) | ||
:I have one interpretation. "Non-canon" refers to official material that has since been contradicted, like retcons. Fandom is fan-generated content. Since you bring up the question, however, the templates obviously need to be documented. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 15:54, 4 March 2007 (CST) | :I have one interpretation. "Non-canon" refers to official material that has since been contradicted, like retcons. Fandom is fan-generated content. Since you bring up the question, however, the templates obviously need to be documented. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 15:54, 4 March 2007 (CST) | ||
:On further review: The {{tl|non-canon}} template should be very rarely used (it could be considered, by a wiki vote, to mark all ''[[Galactica 1980]]'' articles with this since that series is so unpopular). However, the {{tl|separate continuity}} template fits the 1980 articles best. We've normally marked retcon material by notes and references in the central article, precluding the need for such a template. The {{tl|fandom}} template is OK for popular sites such as [[Frak party]], but is also a rarity since we aren't trying to document every fan site. This template is OK, but I don't know if non-canon is useful now. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:46, 3 August 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 19:46, 3 August 2007
What's the difference?
Right now we have {{fandom}} and {{non-canon}}, which are used somewhat interchangeably. {{Fandom}} is used 6 times, whereas {{non-canon}} is used only once. What exactly is the difference between these two templates? If they are the same, one of them should be deleted. --Catrope 14:51, 4 March 2007 (CST)
- I have one interpretation. "Non-canon" refers to official material that has since been contradicted, like retcons. Fandom is fan-generated content. Since you bring up the question, however, the templates obviously need to be documented. --Spencerian 15:54, 4 March 2007 (CST)
- On further review: The {{non-canon}} template should be very rarely used (it could be considered, by a wiki vote, to mark all Galactica 1980 articles with this since that series is so unpopular). However, the {{separate continuity}} template fits the 1980 articles best. We've normally marked retcon material by notes and references in the central article, precluding the need for such a template. The {{fandom}} template is OK for popular sites such as Frak party, but is also a rarity since we aren't trying to document every fan site. This template is OK, but I don't know if non-canon is useful now. --Spencerian 14:46, 3 August 2007 (CDT)