Talk:Hook Nebula (System)

Interview

Although I appreciate the effort, I don't think that the interview should be placed on an encyclopedic page. As a primary source, the interview should be hosted on a offsite faction site or in a namespace comparable to Wikisource and then incorporated into the article using the WP:Summary Style guidelines. --Qatar Shendo 20:24, 13 February 2012 (GMT)

There appears to be some precedence for storing "media"-related materials in Category:Media so the interview could arguably be categorized there. --Raith Starlight 02:02, 14 February 2012 (GMT)

Only that that's a CATEGORY not a NAMESPACE like "Talk: " "User: " "Holocron: " etc. I don't like the sources being in the same namespace as the articles as people will get to the pages just by browsing normally (e.g. by using the "Search" function without changing the default settings you only search the article namespace and not the others) . Also, PlayImp in that Category has the same issue with the interview/part of the magazine being in the arcticle and in the main namespace. Is it even possible to create more namespaces for someone atm? --Qatar Shendo 21:09, 14 February 2012 (GMT)

Wikisource is actually not a name space in Wikipedia, but a seperate wiki that is linked to Wikipedia as part of the Wiki project. Setting up a seperate wiki to hold documents would be a bit overrated, more important it would create extra work for Sin. We opted to use the category that Raith pointed to for this.--Dreighton 13:54, 15 February 2012 (GMT)

I know that Wikisource is a seperate Wiki and I don't want to suggest one as it really would be too much extra work ;) MediaWiki:Using Custom Namespaces shows though that it would be possibly to create a namespace like "Source: " or similar. Although work, I think it's better having Sources (including GNS posts in my oppinion that shouldn't be own articles either as they're a primary source) in their own namespace and only linking to them from the articles than them showing up as real articles. Is "we" the Admins of the Holocron or the majority of users here? I would like having a seperate namespace instead of the category but if the consensus is it's too much work I'm fine with the Category. --Qatar Shendo 18:38, 15 February 2012 (GMT)

I'm still not used to best practices in here, I am available to split the interview in a separate page, and put a link to it in this page. I would need some help from someone more expert than me in this, so I can follow a good example on how to deal with such cases. Also, I have created the Resh system page, putting a reference on the GNS article. I don't know if I've done it well or there is a better method to do it. Ready to learn. ;) --Ruben Wan 14:00, 15 February 2012 (GMT)

I updated the page to show you how the references work/should be used. Basically I think any fact should be cited if possible (which it won't be in the Combine) following the WP:Citing guidelines. So for example the "The re-discovery of Resh led to a new wave of exploration and many other discoveries followed" right now is more of "Original Research" as it's uncited and there's no proof of a "new wave of exploration" or "many" other discoveries. I hope that explains a little. But I'm not TERRIBLY good with the Wikipedia standards and such so I'd like someone else to coment on this as well. --Qatar Shendo 18:38, 15 February 2012 (GMT)