Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels/Chronicles of Narnia task force/to do

Questionable or Project-like things to do

I added these sections for ideas that needed discussion before going onto the todo list. After writing some of them out, I now think that they might belong under general discussion instead as they involve a decision more than a task to complete. Empty sections are placeholder. LloydSommerer 22:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Make use of Character Article Template

There was some discussion on the Puddleglum talk page about the poor quality of the example article. I couldn't tell if this was one person's opinion or maybe a real problem. We should decide whether we're going to use the example article and if so then perhaps use the main characters' (I count about 15 of them) articles as collaborations of the week. LloydSommerer 16:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I tried using the example article, and found it very difficult to use. Can we simplify it, and remove the info, so it is blank, and so the info can just be added? Abright5 12:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Nominate articles for GA status

We have some articles that I think currently meet Wikipedia:Good articles status. Can we start a list of them and then nominate them? LloydSommerer 16:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that we should first start up a collaboration of the week/month, and improve articles to the best of our ability before we nominate them. It is hard to get to good article status.

I guess I was just thinking of The Chronicles of Narnia as being ready to go. You're right that the others need at least a little work. LloydSommerer 02:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Redirect Narnia article

Based on comments on the Narnia page, I believe that a fairly large nember of people are arriving there when they search for information on the books (or the movie), and sometimes miss the fact that there is a lot of information available in another article. I'd like to move Narnia to Narnian universe (or something) and redirect Narnia to The Chronicles of Narnia (or perhaps to the portal when it is more complete). This would also involve checking all of the "what links here" articles to make sure they go to the correct page. LloydSommerer 16:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the Narnia article should be merged into Narnia (country), and Narnia be redirected to The Chronicles of Narnia. But, that would take a lot of broken link fixing. How about just an {{otheruses4}} template at the top instead? I think that's the simplest solution. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:18, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Narnia (country) was split from Narnia a few months ago so that we could differentiate between the country and the "multiverse". Another possibility would be to split Narnia into Narnia geography, Narnia history, Narnia inhabitants and Narnia whatever else is in there. Then we could link to them as needed from other articles (perhaps the timeline goes into history) and do a summary of each under Narnia Universe in the TCoN article. I don't think it's any secret that I see TCoN as being the main article for Narnia when we're done. We won't necessarily go that route, but that is my thought. LloydSommerer 04:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think splitting up the article is the answer. They'd probably eventually all get merged back into whatever we rename it. I also wish to keep Narnian timeline separate, because it makes linking dates much easier. I think, really, the best option is to put {{otheruses4|the land|the book series|The Chronicles of Narnia}} at the top, and that saves moving and fixing links, et. al. That's what we do other similar things; e.g. Dawn Treader is about the boat, not the book. It doesn't make sense to redirect Dawn Treader to The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and then move that article to Dawn Treader (boat) or something. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Upon further reflection, splitting up the article probably doesn't accomplish much. I'm still in favor of moving Narnia to Narnia (universe) and redirecting Narnia to TCoN, but there are much more important things to do than opening that can of worms now. I'll bring it up again when it looks like we've made some real progress on the articles. Maybe by then it won't be an issue at all. LloydSommerer 22:21, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Standardize references

Is it worthwhile to have a note somewhere on the projects preference for referencing. My own view is that <ref> tags will be the best option, but that they are not quite there yet. I've been using harvard referencing on the Narnia articles because I think it wil be the easiest to convert to <ref> tags when the time comes. Harvard referencing has a problem with citing chapters instead of pages, and we tend to use chapters with Narnia because of the wide number of editions in print. LloydSommerer 16:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Character list redirect cleanup

There are many pages that are redirected[1] to the List of characters in The Chronicles of Narnia. I realize that redirect removal is normally considered a waste of time, but, in this case, we can make it easier on users by redirecting to sections within the list so that it is easier to find the information about the character that they clicked on. Any thoughts? LloydSommerer 21:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean by linking to #F or #Adaptations or something? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. As an example: from The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe we would change [[Mr. Beaver]] to [[List of characters in The Chronicles of Narnia#B]]. My understanding is that normally "fixing" redirects isn't productive, but I think this is a usability improvement. (I know you didn't need this much of an explanation, but someone else might) LloydSommerer 22:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm up for it. I'm fairly efficient at repairing links because it's a mindless effort. :-) Just also know that I'll be away until the 27th. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 23:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Adding the stub template to Stub Articles (to-do item 4)

I have done this as well as I can. Can someone check this over? Abright5 12:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)