This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Manual of Style/Portals page. |
|
![]() |
Portals ![]() ![]() | ||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Manual of Style ![]() ![]() | |||||||||
|
I worked it over a little for clarity, grammar and punctuation, linking, etc. Not very substantive, but the gist of this already appeared substantively correct to me. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should this page, formalising the applicability of the MoS to portals (with a few exceptions), be adopted as a Manual of Style guideline? - Evad37 [ talk 02:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Note: I have notified the MoS talk page [1], WikiProject Portals [2], Village pumps (policy [3], proposals [4]), Wikipedia talk:Portal [5], Wikipedia talk:Portal guidelines [6] - Evad37 [ talk 03:06, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Knowledgekid87: This page is not intending to specify layout or content, like WP:PORTG does – layout is explicitly mentioned as an are where the MoS guidelines wouldn't apply. But just because the layout section isn't directly applicable to portals doesn't mean that (most of) the rest of the MoS, like MOS:UNIT, should be ignored by portals. - Evad37 [ talk 02:58, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
@
Tamwin: Regarding full of binding rule[s]
, mechanical
, legalistic
– I didn't think anything here was suggesting that this page or any part of the MoS was anything more than a guideline (i.e. should normally be followed, but use common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply). And specify what portions of the manual of style don't make sense for portals, and what specific guidelines are more relevant
was certainly my intent – each of the top-level list items in the Exceptions sections are the areas of the MoS that, in full or in part, don't make sense for portals, followed by a subpoint explaining what does make sense for portals. -
Evad37 [
talk
02:58, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
@ Barkeep49: This page is a litte different to the other MoS pages since it's not saying (as a guideline which may have occasional common sense exceptions) "Do this, don't do do that, do this instead", but rather "the MoS applies to portals, except in these areas" – without being too prescriptive, so that portal editors can still create and maintain unique and interesting portal designs, and try innovative new ideas, as is currently the case. - Evad37 [ talk 02:58, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that the restriction on collapsed content is appropriate to portals. There may be many applications where default display of a list, category tree, table, index or suchlike visually unexciting but helpful content may unduly clutter the portal. Portal development is in a state of flux, and should not be excessively constrained at this stage. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:58, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Discuss:
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Manual of Style/Portals page. |
|
![]() |
Portals ![]() ![]() | ||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Manual of Style ![]() ![]() | |||||||||
|
I worked it over a little for clarity, grammar and punctuation, linking, etc. Not very substantive, but the gist of this already appeared substantively correct to me. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should this page, formalising the applicability of the MoS to portals (with a few exceptions), be adopted as a Manual of Style guideline? - Evad37 [ talk 02:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Note: I have notified the MoS talk page [1], WikiProject Portals [2], Village pumps (policy [3], proposals [4]), Wikipedia talk:Portal [5], Wikipedia talk:Portal guidelines [6] - Evad37 [ talk 03:06, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Knowledgekid87: This page is not intending to specify layout or content, like WP:PORTG does – layout is explicitly mentioned as an are where the MoS guidelines wouldn't apply. But just because the layout section isn't directly applicable to portals doesn't mean that (most of) the rest of the MoS, like MOS:UNIT, should be ignored by portals. - Evad37 [ talk 02:58, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
@
Tamwin: Regarding full of binding rule[s]
, mechanical
, legalistic
– I didn't think anything here was suggesting that this page or any part of the MoS was anything more than a guideline (i.e. should normally be followed, but use common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply). And specify what portions of the manual of style don't make sense for portals, and what specific guidelines are more relevant
was certainly my intent – each of the top-level list items in the Exceptions sections are the areas of the MoS that, in full or in part, don't make sense for portals, followed by a subpoint explaining what does make sense for portals. -
Evad37 [
talk
02:58, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
@ Barkeep49: This page is a litte different to the other MoS pages since it's not saying (as a guideline which may have occasional common sense exceptions) "Do this, don't do do that, do this instead", but rather "the MoS applies to portals, except in these areas" – without being too prescriptive, so that portal editors can still create and maintain unique and interesting portal designs, and try innovative new ideas, as is currently the case. - Evad37 [ talk 02:58, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that the restriction on collapsed content is appropriate to portals. There may be many applications where default display of a list, category tree, table, index or suchlike visually unexciting but helpful content may unduly clutter the portal. Portal development is in a state of flux, and should not be excessively constrained at this stage. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:58, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Discuss: