Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/Family Trees: Difference between revisions
Discussion page of Battlestar Wiki:Think Tank/Family Trees
More actions
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Joe Beaudoin Jr. in topic When to Use
No edit summary |
→When to Use: reply |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:I know I'm getting into this late, and that this has been discussed back in April, so I beg forgiveness for my tardiness and resurrection of a potentially dead subject. I'm trying to become more involved with the wiki and thought I'd continue discussing Think Tank Proposals. That said, I think Serenity is dead on. If there is only one member of a family tree there's no point in including it. | :I know I'm getting into this late, and that this has been discussed back in April, so I beg forgiveness for my tardiness and resurrection of a potentially dead subject. I'm trying to become more involved with the wiki and thought I'd continue discussing Think Tank Proposals. That said, I think Serenity is dead on. If there is only one member of a family tree there's no point in including it. | ||
I'd like to know as much as the next guy as much as possible about the character's backgrounds. However, a lot of them lost their families in the Cylon attacks and there's no real point to including Unknown Mother, Unknown Father, Cally - Chief Tyrol - Offspring, etc. That becomes too lengthy and it also falls close to, in my opinion, fanwankery.--[[User:Jonathan|Jonathan]] 00:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | I'd like to know as much as the next guy as much as possible about the character's backgrounds. However, a lot of them lost their families in the Cylon attacks and there's no real point to including Unknown Mother, Unknown Father, Cally - Chief Tyrol - Offspring, etc. That becomes too lengthy and it also falls close to, in my opinion, fanwankery.--[[User:Jonathan|Jonathan]] 00:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
::: I believe the use of "family trees" should be done on a case by case basis. For instance, I believe the Adamas should have a family tree, since that family is huge and we can trace the tree back within a couple of generations. Beyond that, I don't think the Tyrols need one, since that family tree is more of a shrub, and is summarized by the character's infoboxes. Same can be said for some of the characters from the original series, like Adama and his family... no need for a tree there, really. | |||
::: There is such a thing as over-stating facts, and I believe that the whole family tree thing is a prime example of that, if used incorrectly and indiscriminately. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 00:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
== How to Use == | == How to Use == | ||
Latest revision as of 00:54, 25 August 2008
When to Use
I'd only use this for families with three generations. Grandparents, parents, children. Or if there are "lateral" relatives like brothers, aunts and such. But not for two parents with a kid or two. That's too obvious. -- Serenity 16:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- On articles or even just as 'created' templates in a potential series page? Shane (talk) 16:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- That's for articles. If you mean a series of pages solely for family trees, then we could be more generous, but again, what's the point of a diagram for something simple? -- Serenity 17:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- I know I'm getting into this late, and that this has been discussed back in April, so I beg forgiveness for my tardiness and resurrection of a potentially dead subject. I'm trying to become more involved with the wiki and thought I'd continue discussing Think Tank Proposals. That said, I think Serenity is dead on. If there is only one member of a family tree there's no point in including it.
I'd like to know as much as the next guy as much as possible about the character's backgrounds. However, a lot of them lost their families in the Cylon attacks and there's no real point to including Unknown Mother, Unknown Father, Cally - Chief Tyrol - Offspring, etc. That becomes too lengthy and it also falls close to, in my opinion, fanwankery.--Jonathan 00:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- I believe the use of "family trees" should be done on a case by case basis. For instance, I believe the Adamas should have a family tree, since that family is huge and we can trace the tree back within a couple of generations. Beyond that, I don't think the Tyrols need one, since that family tree is more of a shrub, and is summarized by the character's infoboxes. Same can be said for some of the characters from the original series, like Adama and his family... no need for a tree there, really.
- There is such a thing as over-stating facts, and I believe that the whole family tree thing is a prime example of that, if used incorrectly and indiscriminately. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate - Battlestar Pegasus 00:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)