Difference between revisions of "Talk:ATD 1-25"
(Robot, let's talk about spoilers) |
m (→Spoilers Invisible Text: oops, fixed link) |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Not a bad idea, but I greatly would prefer the following method: | Not a bad idea, but I greatly would prefer the following method: | ||
− | : See also [[ATD_171-198#Page_198 Page 198]] (spoilers). | + | : See also [[ATD_171-198#Page_198|Page 198]] (spoilers). |
I prefer this for two reasons. 1) There won't be duplicated content, so there won't be two or more entries for someone to edit. 2) Even though the spoiler text is in white, contributors will see the text when editing pages. We want to discourage that. What do you think? | I prefer this for two reasons. 1) There won't be duplicated content, so there won't be two or more entries for someone to edit. 2) Even though the spoiler text is in white, contributors will see the text when editing pages. We want to discourage that. What do you think? |
Revision as of 14:58, 22 December 2006
Contents
Spoilers Invisible Text
Robot, I see you're experimenting with adding spoiler content such as this:
- Spoiler (highlight with mouse to read): The phrase is also found on p198, as one of Webb's last thoughts. End of spoiler.
Not a bad idea, but I greatly would prefer the following method:
- See also Page 198 (spoilers).
I prefer this for two reasons. 1) There won't be duplicated content, so there won't be two or more entries for someone to edit. 2) Even though the spoiler text is in white, contributors will see the text when editing pages. We want to discourage that. What do you think?
Again, though, I am greatly troubled by even my suggested format. This section was created by me with one purpose in mind: to be spoiler-free. Spoiler additions can only benefit the second-time reader, and this section of the wiki is meant to help the first-time reader. That's its purpose. If you have some notes to make that involve spoilers, why not add them to the Alpha index, for instance here by creating an entry in the L section for "Light over the ranges."? Bleakhaus 14:57, 22 December 2006 (PST)
Cut contribs- let's talk about them
p 11 "plummet/bad physics": i am a physics idiot/wiki newbie, but i dont get it why it should be bad physics here. You write: "... Once the Inconvenience loses its buoyancy, it will continue to fall, unless its weight is reduced to what a lesser amount of hydrogen could support." Thats exactly what Cosmo commands Counterfly to do on p 12: ("...jettison our sandbags or we are done for!"). Seems to be of the essence to both close the valve asap and to get rid of the ballast to make good for the loss of gas, right?
Ragtime
Doctorow fictionalises the same era, including anarchists, bombings, early Hollywood.--Robot 13:31, 5 December 2006 (PST)
I wonder if there isn't some way to connect the annotations by page, perhaps with a little navigation box at the bottom of each set of pages that allows you to go back and forth without having to go back to the main 'Annotations by Page' page and select the next set of pages?
One could just add this at the end with the usual double-equals section header, but then it'd show up in the table of contents at the top. Maybe not a bad thing, but I figured I'd bring it up here and see what folks thought before trying it. -- cswingle Wed Dec 6 09:28:52 AKST 2006
- The template ATD PbP inserts the following into an article when you type
{{ATD PbP}}
:
Part One: The Light Over the Ranges |
|
---|---|
Part Two: Iceland Spar |
119-148, 149-170, 171-198, 199-218, 219-242, 243-272, 273-295, 296-317, 318-335, 336-357, 358-373, 374-396, 397-428 |
Part Three: Bilocations |
429-459, 460-488, 489-524, 525-556, 557-587, 588-614, 615-643, 644-677, 678-694 |
Part Four: Against the Day |
pages coming soon |
Part Five: Rue de Départ |
pages coming soon |
- BlakeStacey 11:31, 6 December 2006 (PST)
- well, we've got two options: place the whole table of contents at the bottom of each page, or perhaps just links to the previous and subsequent page. Bleakhaus 14:26, 6 December 2006 (PST)
- I don't think the full TOC at the bottom is needed, although we could do it that way. I think it'd be most convenient and inobtrusive if there were links going forward and backward to the previous and next set of pages. For example: (1-25 previous | next 57-80), if you happen to be sitting at the end of pages 26-56. cswingle Wed Dec 6 13:31:57 AKST 2006
- I'm not sure users necessarily want to click "next" through each successive set of pages. I'm more in favor of just having it at the bottom of the page. If it shows up in the ToC, that's okay, right? It's easy to try out, so let me now try it out now (see pp.1-25 and see what everybody (or concerned parties) think. WikiAdmin 17:56, 6 December 2006 (PST)
- although either way would work, i note that inserting the ToC is much easier that coding the 35-40 pages individually... not that it's a HUGE deal, but... Bleakhaus 18:59, 6 December 2006 (PST)
- I like the way it looks, and it's not really an issue that it's in the ToC. Thanks. cswingle Thu Dec 7 08:33:14 AKST 2006
Spoiler template
I threw together a spoiler warning template which might be useful for demarcating sections of pages which have spoilers in later parts but not in all. Use {{spoiler}}
to get the following:
BlakeStacey 11:20, 6 December 2006 (PST)