Difference between revisions of "Talk:Away team"

From Imperial Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (corrected wikicode)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
** Analysis is great, but ''mark it as such''. Make a new header or something. Right now the article's just cluttered --[[User:Bounty|Bounty]] 16:02, 14 November 2007 (EST)
** Analysis is great, but ''mark it as such''. Make a new header or something. Right now the article's just cluttered --[[User:Bounty|Bounty]] 16:02, 14 November 2007 (EST)
::References would be nice. They can be added by:
::References would be nice. They can be added by:
::*<tt><nowiki>http://www.google.com</nowiki></tt> (creates a numbered external link)
::*<tt><nowiki>[http://www.google.com]</nowiki></tt> (creates a numbered external link)
::*<tt><nowiki><ref>http://www.google.com</ref></nowiki></tt> in the article with <tt><nowiki><references/></nowiki></tt> at the end of the article to "catch" the footnotes (if it doesn't exist).
::*<tt><nowiki><ref>http://www.google.com</ref></nowiki></tt> in the article with <tt><nowiki><references/></nowiki></tt> at the end of the article to "catch" the footnotes (if it doesn't exist).
:: - [[User:Mad|Mad]] 16:04, 14 November 2007 (EST)
:: - [[User:Mad|Mad]] 16:04, 14 November 2007 (EST)
** Okay I added new headers to separate the analysis from the others and deleted the most speculative bullshit, especially the part telling the Federation how to do its job. I'll put in references in a little bit -- Brian.

Latest revision as of 21:09, 14 November 2007

Perhaps the factual information (incidents, equipment) and analysis (especially the "Age of Sail" stuff) in the article should be separated? It's hard to see what comes from the series and what comes from Brian's head--Bounty 15:08, 14 November 2007 (EST)

  • A lot of this stuff is stuff discussed before on SDN, especially the Age of Sail analogy in TOS. If you don't want it here, fine, or if you want references to specific threads or more specific examples, fine, but there's more a wiki than just stating the facts. Interpretation of data is vitally important, rather than just throwing out random trivia or factoids to be memorized, if the wiki's going to live -- Brian.
    • Analysis is great, but mark it as such. Make a new header or something. Right now the article's just cluttered --Bounty 16:02, 14 November 2007 (EST)
References would be nice. They can be added by:
  • [http://www.google.com] (creates a numbered external link)
  • <ref>http://www.google.com</ref> in the article with <references/> at the end of the article to "catch" the footnotes (if it doesn't exist).
- Mad 16:04, 14 November 2007 (EST)
    • Okay I added new headers to separate the analysis from the others and deleted the most speculative bullshit, especially the part telling the Federation how to do its job. I'll put in references in a little bit -- Brian.