Template talk:Pna-episode

placement on page
Because of the episode side-bars, the side of the template is usually cut off. I was wondering if it could be changed to be further to the left, so the whole box can be seen. Jaz talk]] 18:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Or we could just use this template like every other pna-template (and many other templates in general) and add the note to the bottom of an article instead of somewhere in the middle, where it doesn't help editors and only distracts readers from what content is already there. Since most pages that use this template do at least contain the "standard" structure, that would move the note well below the sidebar. -- Cid Highwind 23:15, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Rollback reasons
I rolled back the last edit to this page, which consisted of mainly two changes: -- Cid Highwind 16:18, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) The title - every other PNA message highlights a problem ("is incomplete", "needs citation", ...), and most other messages state their specific function as well. After the last edit, this one just said "Red Alert!", which isn't terribly useful.
 * 2) The link - A link to the user page User:Vedek Dukat/Episodes was added together with a request to update that page when placing/removing this message somewhere. Not only is this counterproductive because PNA messages are supposed to work automatically (by having a category link inside the template, which already produces a list of pages to work on), it also brings up the still unanswered question of whether we really want to have user pages mixed with "official" project pages. A suggestion was made to move the user page above to Memory Alpha:User projects/Episode duty roster. These two objections are already under discussion here and here.


 * Memory Alpha does take itself a bit too seriously (kind of like post-TNG Trek series), and I would prefer "Red Alert!" with a small picture on the side to a bland statement of purpose (considering the text below could just as easily explain the purpose). But for the record so no one misinterprets my stance on this, I don't care one way or the other about where the duty roster ends up. --Vedek Dukat Talk 17:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * A small red alert sign would be ok, but the pna and reason should really be added to make the PNAs look uniform. -- Kobi - (   ) 18:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

What about the attention sign already in use for missing images? I could also provide that in different resolutions, colors, with other icons etc. -- Cid Highwind 10:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Moved from Vfd

 * Template:Pna-episode : Essentially unused (4 pages) and, more important, a near duplicate of Template:Pna-incomplete, just specialized on episodes. I don't think this is necessary, delete and replace with the incomplete message. -- Cid Highwind 14:47, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm abstaining because of personal bias in the Duty Roster vs Template debate, but I wanted to note that this could be used in conjunction with the Duty Roster if it links to the roster or something similar to that. The idea of categorizing episodes this way obviously fell through, but if people want to use this the way we do with multiple stub templates, I don't see a problem. Weyoun 02:47, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not too sure if I'd call this unnessary or not. I know we've tried to avoid placing the incomplete template in episode articles in the past, so this seems like a good way to handle it. Then again, I'm not entirely certain a template is needed for one section of an article, and it is a near-duplicate of the incomplete template. I don't know -- this is one of those cases where I'll have to remain neutral until I hear some more opinions as to why or why not to keep this. --From Andoria with Love 21:03, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * My first question would be: Is there any good reason why it was avoided to use the incomplete template on episode pages? I can't imagine any if we're placing a similarly worded one linking to the same category on the page at the same time... -- Cid Highwind 02:14, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't ask me. I just work here. :P All I know is that incomplete templates were previously added to the episodes, but were subsequently deleted because "episode articles don't get templates". --From Andoria with Love 21:55, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)


 * Since we have the "EDR" project of Vedek Dukat we don't need a special template for incomplete episode pages, not even the regular pna. So delete it. --Memory 23:16, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think we should keep this and use it in conjunction with the Duty Roster to keep things in synch. --Vedek Dukat Talk 23:22, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)


 * Please, the PNA messages and the Duty Roster are completely different approaches, and I really think they don't mix well. Surely I don't feel like "updating the episode duty roster" manually (as the undiscussed change to the template asks me to do) if the way a PNA template is intended to work is to automatically do something similar. Vice versa, if I'm working with the Duty Roster, why should I additionally add templates to pages I'm not actually working on? Regarding the "no 'incomplete' templates on episode pages" I don't see any good reason for that, nor am I aware of any discussion or decision regarding this. Episode articles are articles, and if they are incomplete, they should be marked as such. -- Cid Highwind 02:27, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and apply to episode pages. I agree with the Vedek (that seems to happen a lot lately) on this one. As far as the automatic updating with templates, it's just common courtesy to update the duty roster so we don't get our wires crossed when you write a summary, plus it lets new people know the roster exists. Thus the other concern is irrelevant if we simply apply it to all episodes currently listed on the roster. It's the best of both words. :-) Weyoun 08:11, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)


 * As I said above, I know I wouldn't (if I used that message in the first place) - not to prove a point, but because I would expect this PNA message to behave just like every other PNA message: I add a template "describing a general problem" somewhere, and somewhere else a link to that page pops up on a list. "Common courtesy" is nice in theory, but this suggestion complicates what would otherwise be a nice&clean process by asking me to do exactly those things that this very class of templates is supposed to avoid. Besides, this is, again, a case of some link to this page "creeping into" other unrelated processes. We already have a discussion about this somewhere, so let's discuss this there, if still necessary. Can we get some more comments by others, perhaps? -- Cid Highwind 11:24, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I'm of the mind that it's Vedek Dukat's brainchild and therefore we should let him do what he sees fit (so long as it make sense), after all it does say official duty roster. But in this case, I don't think it is a big problem - if an episode has been finished and the Duty Roster has not yet been updated, someone will eventually update the Roster. So the extra template is probably not necessary. (The Duty Roster does have its purpose and it serves us well enough.) Makon 11:37, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Although I think this could be used in conjunction with the duty roster without causing confusion, I have no intention of going away and can continue to hunt down people who don't know the duty roster exists. So in the end, I guess pna-incomplete works fine, although this makes things complicated for archivists who want to work on non-episode pages. --Vedek Dukat Talk 17:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I am inclined to keep this as pna templates requiring the coinciding talk pages are rarely used properly. Unlike Template:Pna-incomplete, which requires and explaination on the talk page...and which many times is not used properly, Template:Pna-episode specifies what needs attention without the use of a talk page and will edit that specific section (summary) requiring attention. --Alan del Beccio 22:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep per what Alan said. Sorry, I don't mean to act like John Kerry. :) --Vedek Dukat Talk 07:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Useless
What incomplete pages need is a statement of what exactly it is the page is lacking. This template is effectively useless because it lacks that. I just saw it on, where it only serves to leave a bad impression on the reader; I have no idea what is supposed to be missing from the episode summary, so even though I (somewhat) know the episode, it doesn't actually invite me to help improve the page. &mdash; Timwi 21:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The "summary" is the part of the article located is the subsection marked ==Summary== . Its considered "incomplete" because someone thought it could be lengthened. This template should only be added to the part of the episode article marked "summary", so that you will know that that is the portion that requires editing. -- Captain M.K.B. 23:34, 18 April 2006 (UTC)