Battlestar Wiki:Standards and Conventions/Episode Guides

From Battlestar Wiki, the free, open content Battlestar Galactica encyclopedia and episode guide
< Battlestar Wiki:Standards and Conventions
Revision as of 20:24, 24 April 2008 by Joe Beaudoin Jr. (talk | contribs) (→‎Analysis and Notes Sections: + sectioning and the inline ref thing)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
BSG WIKI SC.png This page is one of Battlestar Wiki's many projects.
This page serves to coordinate discussion on a particular aspect of this Wiki. The formal recommendations of a project may be treated as policies.

Battlestar Wiki's Standards and Conventions
Standards for...

... Page Formatting
... Article Prose and Grammar
... Cast and Crew Biographies
... Episode Guides
... Disambiguations
... Quote of the Day pages

This page covers how to deal with content on our episode guides.

Episode pages

Summary Section

The summary section, unless there are (at least) two distinct non-overlapping storylines, should always be in Act 1, Act 2, etc. header formats. Bonus scenes should also in their own header.

Questions Section

Every episode-synopsis article includes a section called "Questions". The idea behind the section is, "These are the questions this episode raises and does not answer by itself". Since these pages are encyclopedic, it is not intended that the "Questions" section be used to actually speculate as to the answers! Please use the Analysis section of an episode article for brief speculation.

The rules of thumb on questions are:

  1. If a question is raised and not answered in the episode, it belongs in the Questions section on the encyclopedic page.
  2. If a question is added to the encyclopedic page that was actually answered in the same episode's events, it is policy to move both the question and the answer to the Talk page, because it isn't really an unanswered question. If an ambiguous or obscure topic reoccurs (or seems likely to), then it might belong in "Analysis" or "Notes".
  3. If a question is answered in a later episode, the analysis for that episode should note that the event refers to an earlier open plot point. The original page can be edited to point forward to the answer, but the answer itself should not be edited into the page for the episode that posed the question. An early example of this style appears on the encyclopedia page for the episode "Water": "Why do the Cylons want to keep Karl Agathon on Caprica?"
    • The typical style is to add (Answer) after the question, linked to the episode that answers the question. If there are multiple episodes that add significant, substantial answers to a question, you should add multiple episodes like so:
  4. Debates and discussion have no place on the encyclopedic pages; only on the talk pages. Encyclopedic pages should be neutral-point-of-view and descriptive. That is, when responding to a question, do not phrase the answer in such a way that the question (and the article) appears to be "arguing with itself". If you find yourself adding a question that contains a pronoun ("I think") or uses a contradiction ("But the Cylons..."), then the question must be rephrased into analysis, or placed on the talk page.
  5. If a dispute occurs on whether a question is germane, appropriately located or answered, the debate should be moved over to a topic on the article's talk page. To aid others with the same question, a link to the debate should be added to the question so others know that this topic has an extended discussion elsewhere.
  6. Last, but not least, when in doubt, ask your fellow contributors.

Analysis and Notes Sections

As noted above, answers to questions that aren't directly answered by an episode, but can be answered by speculation and deduction, need to be placed in "Analysis".

As the name implies, this is the place to analyze an episode's plot or its role in advancing a larger arc. Speculation is acceptable as long as it's logical and written from a neutral point of view. Replying to someone else's analysis with own, perhaps conflicting, points is acceptable as well to a certain degree. However, keep in mind that Battlestar Wiki is not a forum. There should be no back and forth arguing. If something is disputed, it needs be discussed on the talk page and, when a consensus has been reached, presented from a neutral point of view in the article. Moreover, more than two or three nested bullet points are usually unnecessary. In such a case, points can often be combined.

Analysis sections are also a good place to answer questions that have been raised by previous episodes, and noted in those episodes' guides. Ensure that you use the {{inlineref}} template to "anchor" the section so that it can be better linked to. (i.e. A question on whether or not Laura Roslin's cancer will return asked in "Epiphanies" can link back to the answer by adding: ([[Crossroads, Part I#Cancer's Return|Answer]]) at the end of such a question. The portion of that link after the pound sign tells the web browser to jump to the anchor point defined as "Cancer's Return".

The result of using that code will look like this:

  • Will Laura Roslin's cancer return despite using Hera's blood as a treatment? (Answer)

The "Notes" section is for obvious items of interest related to the article that require no further explanation or speculation. These can be facts from the episode, behind the scenes information gleaned from interviews or podcasts, and the like.


For both "Analysis" and "Notes" that are of reasonable length, content within these sections should be sub-sectioned depending on their topic for organizational and flow reasons. For instance, content pertaining to the Cylons should be sub-sectioned under "The Cylons", while content pertaining to a character (like Lee Adama) should be sectioned under the character's name.

Items that are general can be sectioned under a "General" header, or left unsectioned. However, if they are left unsectioned, this content should come before any sub-sectioned points.