 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Added edit
Hi all, I have put in the infobox and a few wikilinks. (MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 06:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC))
- Hi, thanks for your contributions and for stumbling accross Mr. Liston which I created a few months ago. With regards to the infobox, I wholly disagree with them for biographies. The infobox you have added serves no purpous at all as everything contained within it can be found in the first few lines of the lead section. This now makes it very repetetive. Some would argue that an infobox's purpous is to help the reader find information quickly without having to search the whole article that we spend a great deal of time writing; Liston's infobox doesn't even do that as the article is so small and everything can be seen at a quick glance. -- CassiantoTalk 08:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Cassianto, thanks for taking the time to write to me. I consider that the infobox is something that gives the page on a whole a style and a feel that makes it a "wikipedia page". One that I am sure we both hope would grow with time and input from others i.e. someone adds a picture, followed by more sections. It is simply done to help things grows. I agree it provides a small amount of repetition (not "very"), but it is short and concise, more so than the article itself, so it serves its point. If it makes you unhappy then it's your choice what to do with it. Again Sir, thank you for the time you have taken to create this page and to share your feelings. (MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 08:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC))
- Nope, your edits are as good as anyone's and I shall leave. Not too sure an infobox adds "style" or diffentiates between it being a WP page or not a WP page though. It's true, a lot of biographies do carry an infobox, but then some do not. This guidline states it is a personal preference only and local discussions need to take place in order to meet a consensus of "for" and "against" if one is to be added or not. I'm not going that far with this so I shall leave it in place (although I do think it's redundent). All the best! -- CassiantoTalk 09:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)