Category talk:Minor Characters: Difference between revisions
Old Dickens (talk | contribs) (for what?) |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Why do minor characters need a category other than [[:Category:Discworld characters|Discworld characters]]? It seems like just rubbing it in, poor things. --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens|talk]]) 20:25, 22 November 2013 (GMT) | Why do minor characters need a category other than [[:Category:Discworld characters|Discworld characters]]? It seems like just rubbing it in, poor things. --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens|talk]]) 20:25, 22 November 2013 (GMT) | ||
I was wondering if the definitions for each character category needed tighter work. so I wondered if a four-step system would work for defining the status of a character: guidelines for deciding whether this person is the Male Or female Lead. a Best Supporting Character, an Incidental character or an Extra. | |||
As after a prolonged beta-test involving hitting the Random Page button a lot, and assessing which of these four headings the characters belonged in, I only got ONE who fitted the definition, then it isn't very important - just marginal fiddling.[[User:AgProv|AgProv]] ([[User talk:AgProv|talk]]) 22:37, 22 November 2013 (GMT) | |||
:The thing is, out of 1131 Discworld characters there are 37 Leading characters and 85 Supporting characters (some of whom don't belong there either), so the Minor characters category isn't going to be very different from the DW characters. It's similar to my complaint about the List of characters: if you break things up into too many categories it's too hard to know where to look for one. | |||
You're right. Let's lose it. worth experimenting with, though! [[User:AgProv|AgProv]] ([[User talk:AgProv|talk]]) 00:31, 23 November 2013 (GMT) | |||
Latest revision as of 00:31, 23 November 2013
Why do minor characters need a category other than Discworld characters? It seems like just rubbing it in, poor things. --Old Dickens (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2013 (GMT)
I was wondering if the definitions for each character category needed tighter work. so I wondered if a four-step system would work for defining the status of a character: guidelines for deciding whether this person is the Male Or female Lead. a Best Supporting Character, an Incidental character or an Extra.
As after a prolonged beta-test involving hitting the Random Page button a lot, and assessing which of these four headings the characters belonged in, I only got ONE who fitted the definition, then it isn't very important - just marginal fiddling.AgProv (talk) 22:37, 22 November 2013 (GMT)
- The thing is, out of 1131 Discworld characters there are 37 Leading characters and 85 Supporting characters (some of whom don't belong there either), so the Minor characters category isn't going to be very different from the DW characters. It's similar to my complaint about the List of characters: if you break things up into too many categories it's too hard to know where to look for one.
You're right. Let's lose it. worth experimenting with, though! AgProv (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2013 (GMT)