Ten Forward → Year pages (Reply | Watch)

Do the Year pages follow any "logic"? I find it difficult to follow (in-universe) events chronologically, because it seems that the pages are somehow just "crowded" with information... I could start thinking about a better structure, if that's ok...? -- Tkhobbes 18:01, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

We of course welcome all contributions, so it'd be fine if you worked on our many pages dealing with time and chicken.

If you want to see how far I got trying to organize the mess before I got frustrated, check out the 2364 page to see my take on it. -- Captain MKB 18:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Not bad... :) however, the problem I see is that you have a LOT of events listed there in order of Stardates. What I thought of is kind of expand the list by "topic" - like births and deaths, or maybe major conflicts, or battles, or whatever else we have; maybe also by person or show.... I did something similar on MA - check out 2380 there. Folks did not like it and I intend to move this somehow to MB. -- Tkhobbes 20:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I find that stardate arrangement very jarring, and would much prefer we stick to the use of bulleted lists with the stardates emboldened the old fashioned ''' way at the front of any entry with a specific date.

As for arrangement in general, we have a number of standard headings for arranging info on year pages, for busier years I would suggest adding more to divide up the info as best fits that page. The 2364 for instance could probably comfortably accommodate a section along the lines of "starship servicing" --8of5 20:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Here's a proposition on what we could do. Please let me know what you think - here or on my talk page... -- Tkhobbes 21:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Some good ideas, some not so much. As the sections you are detailing are all in-universe info I would avoid heading by the series name. There's also something a bit odd about your writing style in general that seems to forget this is all in-universe and seem more like story telling, headings like "The Borg seek Revenge" are a bit OTT for these sort of pages which are only really giving the basic info.

I think there is certainly a lot of room for improvement on the year pages as far as dividing up the info goes, I don't really think you've got things going in the best direct from that proposal though. I think the idea of a "People" section is a pretty good one, but not dividing it by series - as many of the existing sections (Promotions and transfers, Births and deaths, and Relationships) are already people orientated and could become subsections of that larger heading.

The worlds and races section is a good idea in theory, but it's current set-up isn't that helpful, the information on major empires there is all very interconnected, and separating it out like that isn't necessarily useful. I think a general "Politics" section would be better, with a sub-heading for "conflicts" to cover the main conflict stuff, and then maybe have sections for the Feds, Klings etc to cover INTRNAL politics, but leave the interconnected stuff in the main politics area. --8of5 22:44, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I've done my own proposal, with a template for an idea of standardised layout: User:8of5/timeline. --8of5 23:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey - your proposal is great! I realize that a lot of stuff is interconnected, and we probably can't maintain a strict structure over ALL year pages. However, as the intention is that a reader can follow events fairly quickly, I think this is ok - after all, we are writing for Hew-Moons, not for machines, right? ;) I could start cleaning up some pages - as I am currently focusing on Post-DS9 and Post-Nemesis, I would probably start by covering 2376 to 2381...-- Tkhobbes 22:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd still like for stardates (and also months/days) to be noted, when known -- please note also that the page I worked on was in no way ordered by stardate -- none of the stardates that year were sequential -- they were ordered logically and simply labeled with stardates or month/days. -- Captain MKB 16:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You are right - we could indicate the stardate, but I think the articles would be much more readable if it is indicated AFTER the notion of events - what do you think? -- Tkhobbes 20:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

OK folks - I have combined 8of5's suggestion with the one from Captain MKB and another few bits and pieces.... look here: User:Tkhobbes/timeline. If no one objects, I will start working on 2376 to 2380.

Well, I'm glad to see you adopted my proposal for the layout :) I agree with Mike that things should be dated when possible. I don't agree with putting the dates at the end - The pages are all about chronology, it seems to me chronological placement should therefore be a dominant part of the arrangement, not a note stuck on the end. I've struggled to find any evidence of this, but when I've formatted year pages with dates in the past I've done it with the stardate or calendar date emboldened at the beginning of the bulleted piece of information. So for the example on that page:

• Stardate 57023.3: Tal'Aura consolidates her hold on the praetorship of the Romulan Star Empire, and by the end of the year is opposed only by Imperial Fleet Commander Donatra, whose fleet seizes control of several farming worlds.

I realise Mike has a bit of a thing for the code that used a semi-colon to make things bold, however I think on pages like this it makes thing really confusing and hard to read, as that form of emboldening looks like section heading. It also means we keep consistency in the bulleted lists, just adding a date on the front when it's known.

I also thing that once the info is divided into sections it should be listed roughly chronologically, that way for things where dates aren’t given they are at least placed in chronological context amongst dated items. --8of5 14:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

OK - I altered my proposal; it now indicates stardates, where I had them (not many, unfortunately), and I also ordered the events chronologically wherever possible (e.g. although both the novels "Resistance" and "Before Dishonor" do not indicate any stardates at all, "Resistance" takes place before "Before Dishonor" - so whatever events occur in "Resistance" are placed before those occurring in "Before Dishonor"). as said before, I will start editing the years 2376 - 2381 very soon, implementing this new template.

One last question: Is there a place to store such "templates" - I understand it's not a template in a mediawiki-technical sense, but it still is a "logical" one... -- Tkhobbes 09:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, on the dates, those ones specifically, later novels, such as Greater Than the Sum give some indication of placement, which allows us to put in place on the Memory Beta Chronology, and the chronology listing for each year is also on the year page in the stories section, so we have a pretty good idea of what order everything goes in even if we can't give it a specific date.

As for storing page layout "templates", the only place we really have is the Memory Beta:Style page, and I would suggest we need a larger community consensus on the format before making it overly official and putting it there. --8of5 13:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll start updating the articles now (in fact, 2380 is ready... :) - as for the Style bit - how do we get the community consensus? By just adapting the pages and then see what happens? -- Tkhobbes 14:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Well ideally other members of the community would make their opinions known here... --8of5 15:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

That pahe layout looks like it has a lot of subsections, but it breaks down the information well and makes it easier to find. I would say go with it.--Long Live the United Earth 19:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

2380 and 2381 are adapted; 2380 is missing content from "Greater Than the Sum", which I will add in the next few days (this has nothing to do with the new structure, though...) -- Tkhobbes 21:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC)