Wikipedia: 1977/Talk

Maybe it's just me, but I find the following way of indicating headings unintuitive:

Arts and Entertainment
- Book
- a song by TheClash?; Lyrics1977

A collection of work by JRR Tolkien, The Silmarillion is published posthumously by his son, Christopher.

Usually, a bullet is used for a listed item, not to indicate a heading. One more ordinary convention would rewrite the above as follows:

Arts and Entertainment

Books?
A collection of work by JRR Tolkien, The Silmarillion is published posthumously by his son, Christopher.

Something like that, anyway.

By the way, I really don't see what interest there is in having lyrics from Clash songs on Wikipedia. :-) Again, maybe it's just me... :-) --LMS

Two approaches:

single page factoid list of information contained on other pages (e.g., Nobel prize, academy awards) along with other summary information
just the summary information without links to academy awards, nobel prizes, etc.

It would get really cluttered when you add:

superbowl
world series
wimbledon (sp?)
nascar
golf (masters, ryder cup, etc)
grammys
tonys

I vote for summary information only and not all of the factoids that are contained in other lists.

Do this give us a feature list like?

'GREP [page title]? "string"'

which includes one or more lines from a page within the currently being viewed page.

Selective include/partial include of pages may bog wiki down too much especially on a large scale.

As far as the clash 1977 song, just mentioning the album would be enough...see the page on the clash for real info.

Also, only 'significant' books/music should be included. That would be accomplished by 'popular' vote in many people reviewing/changing the page.

The bulleted format is just a test of style, I did try indenting the headers but that looked worse.

As for information, well, there should be enough on each year page to make it read sensibly and contain a link to the real meaty page on the particular subject.

What would be bad is if each year page just ends up looking like some boring page of stats that hold together as real English .

Finally, with regards to what is valid to make it onto each page, well, I'd say "did it occur in the year in question?" "yes" "include it!" If the page shows a bunch of eclectric stuff that isn't mainstream knowledge, great! Bring on the obscure factoids, the more the merrier.

Above all, these pages should be FUN, if it doesn't raise a smile whilst you're reading the Year in Review pages, then it aint doing its job. --Neeklamy