User talk:Telet093
I think your template is pretty good. Some very minor comments:
The word "tagline" isn't needed at the top of the article. That is a good place for a one or two sentence summary, like you've done, but that's the way most of our articles are laid out, so the tagline label is extraneous.
Making the date of the first airing a wikilink is not necessary, nor is the "8 October" article you created. Stating the date is good. But it's not like we'll have so many different things that happened on 8 October that we need a link to an article about that date.
The featured characters box looks okay to me. Assuming other editors think it's alright too, we can turn it into a template to make sure it has a consistant look across the various articles that would eventually use it.
That's all I've got, I think. Welcome to our Wiki.
--Steve-o 23:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- I echo Steve's concerns about the date links, etc. There is also some data lost between your version and the current template -- namely, knowing which were minor and major characters, and in which order they appeared. I'm not sure losing that is worth the pretty table, but I'll have to give it further thought. --ItsWalky 23:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I really like the idea of having a template like that, as Steve and Walky have also said, but if I may make one suggestion, I think you should really do something about that appearances list; it's too colourful and very distracting. I'd say that something simpler and less obtuse would be better. --Suki Brits 17:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that's much nicer. Good work. --Suki Brits 19:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
