Difference between revisions of "Talk:ATD 1-25"

Revision as of 23:38, 13 December 2006

11-30-06. Have added the tilda (˜) over the n in Richard Fariña's name in the dedication comment. That tilda makes the ñ a completely different letter and pronunciation than the 'n.' It's important to get all the diacritical marks right for Pynchon's sake (he obsesses over these, like he did over things like the shape of the ampersand on the Mason & Dixon cover)--and also because Fariña's name is Spanish, not the English word for a kind of finely ground breakfast cereal. --Pschmid1 19:59, 30 November 2006 (PST)

no need to add sucha discussion to the talk page: just change it. Bleakhaus 12:24, 5 December 2006 (PST)

Cut contribs- let's talk about them

Archived discussion

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!").

Ragtime

Doctorow fictionalises the same era, including anarchists, bombings, early Hollywood.--Robot 13:31, 5 December 2006 (PST)

Navigation

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}}:

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)