Talk:Gloucestershire (cricket): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Chris Day |
imported>John Leach |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
::Something along those lines. I think its more to allow a proper development of content that would otherwise have to be very brief in the main article. So they serve two purposes, keep the details to a minimum in the article and yet allow them to be developed/expanded to something more useful in the subpages. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 04:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC) | ::Something along those lines. I think its more to allow a proper development of content that would otherwise have to be very brief in the main article. So they serve two purposes, keep the details to a minimum in the article and yet allow them to be developed/expanded to something more useful in the subpages. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 04:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
Hi Chris. I've been thinking about the use of catalogs and I agree that the list of noted players should form one and include potted biographical and career notes. I think the honours section would usefully form another. I'll get around to this as I'm still working out my plans for taking cricket coverage forward. --[[User:John Leach|John Leach]] 12:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:50, 28 March 2010
catalogs
John you might want to develop catalogs along the lines of Tennis/Catalogs/Famous_players. You can add a lot more with a direct link to the catalog from the article. Other catalogs could include one for honours, possibly another for team stats. Chris Day 02:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Chris. Am I right in thinking that catalogs are a way of keeping an article to a reasonable size? So, if you need to split an article into smaller portions, you would do it by means of an overview with links to catalog pages? --John Leach 03:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
- Something along those lines. I think its more to allow a proper development of content that would otherwise have to be very brief in the main article. So they serve two purposes, keep the details to a minimum in the article and yet allow them to be developed/expanded to something more useful in the subpages. Chris Day 04:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Chris. I've been thinking about the use of catalogs and I agree that the list of noted players should form one and include potted biographical and career notes. I think the honours section would usefully form another. I'll get around to this as I'm still working out my plans for taking cricket coverage forward. --John Leach 12:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)