Talk:Dragonflight
| WikiProject Novels / Fantasy | (Rated Start-class, High-importance) | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| WikiProject Children's literature | (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] old discussion
Lessa is only disguised as a drudge, or she would have no birthright to Ruatha. DJ Clayworth 19:05, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hola —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.148.217.30 (talk) 15:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Citing McCaffrey
"McCaffrey 1999" may be confusing here, as Mirokado elsewhere warns may happen re Todd & Anne. The main text doesn't now mention Todd (the 1999 author) at either point; he is explicitly identified by fullname only for the reader who clicks twice. Is this potential confusion important? --P64 (talk) 20:49, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Bending the short form citations to use the book title is a bit clumsy. While this only happens in Anne McCaffrey we can handle is specially. If we decide to do that everywhere, it would be better to give up on the italics so the linking can be handled more automatically. I suggest for now, use the automatic handling of author name while we only cite one or other author in the sort form formats for a given article. It will certainly be great fun to provide clear and consistent references for thirty odd articles as they grow! As long as what we do now is reasonably consistent and disciplined it will be easy to make any necessary changes in the future. --Mirokado (talk) 21:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Citing ISFDB
Several pages at ISFDB are now the only "Web sites" under References.
These listings include some of my old detail listings as hidden comments, eg "p8-60, cover & interior (3) illus Schoenherr; map p10; 46+ pp text". Should references to ISFDB be replaced or supplemented by references to Analog on some matters? I have now read the originals, and this is the time to ask whether they should be cited only in reference to what is outside the scope of ISFDB --mainly their content, the original stories.
What should be the layout of the ISFDB citations? I presume they should be grouped together even if other "Web sites" are added. Currently the Analog stories are under Dragonflight (hierarchical) but Dragonflight precedes Dragonriders of Pern (alphabetical or importance?). The instructions regarding ISFDB navigation are part of the Dragonriders of Pern listing, where the current wording fits.
Why provide references to ISFDB in this fashion (eg, Weyr Search ISFDB) parallel to Author Date?
- we anticipate multiple references to the same page at ISFDB, with details that differ as page numbers do?
- we separate the template message "publication contents at the Internet Speculative Fiction Database" from references? (I have wondered whether the template should be modified (switch) or forked (two templates) to generate one message for external links and one for references.)
- we help the observant reader learn about ISFDB, by grouping all the complete citations together? (If so, the layout should not be alphabetical.)
