GoArch talk:Apocrypha: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
===Apocrypha=== | ===Apocrypha=== | ||
Also not a personal favorite, tbh. If anything, it swings too far to the other side of the scale from "fanon" in terms of indicating its reliability. I prefer to leave this for things that are demonstrably ''not'' canon, like the Riven Journals or the Dark Horse comics. --[[User:Alahmnat|Alahmnat]], Grand Master ([[User_talk:Alahmnat|talk]]) 22:08, 4 January 2017 (PST) | Also not a personal favorite, tbh. If anything, it swings too far to the other side of the scale from "fanon" in terms of indicating its reliability. I prefer to leave this for things that are demonstrably ''not'' canon, like the Riven Journals or the Dark Horse comics. --[[User:Alahmnat|Alahmnat]], Grand Master ([[User_talk:Alahmnat|talk]]) 22:08, 4 January 2017 (PST) | ||
===Apocrypha on Main=== | |||
No separate namespace (suggested by Eleri). “Fanon” material would be posted in the Main namespace, with an “Apocrypha” template included at the top to signify that it was non-canon (in which case “Apocrypha” would apply equally to officially-published content and fan material alike). All such content would also be placed in an Apocrypha category. Fan content, official non-canon content, and canon content would all appear in basic search results and page title auto-completes. | |||
--[[User:Alahmnat|Alahmnat]], Grand Master ([[User_talk:Alahmnat|talk]]) 12:56, 12 December 2017 (PST) | |||
Revision as of 20:56, 12 December 2017
Namespace suggestions
Fanon
It's an obvious one, but I've never really cared for the term, and it may still be too officious. Definitely willing to entertain alternatives. --Alahmnat, Grand Master (talk) 22:08, 4 January 2017 (PST)
Apocrypha
Also not a personal favorite, tbh. If anything, it swings too far to the other side of the scale from "fanon" in terms of indicating its reliability. I prefer to leave this for things that are demonstrably not canon, like the Riven Journals or the Dark Horse comics. --Alahmnat, Grand Master (talk) 22:08, 4 January 2017 (PST)
Apocrypha on Main
No separate namespace (suggested by Eleri). “Fanon” material would be posted in the Main namespace, with an “Apocrypha” template included at the top to signify that it was non-canon (in which case “Apocrypha” would apply equally to officially-published content and fan material alike). All such content would also be placed in an Apocrypha category. Fan content, official non-canon content, and canon content would all appear in basic search results and page title auto-completes. --Alahmnat, Grand Master (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2017 (PST)
