Category talk:Apocrypha

From GargWiki

I added a disclaimer to the description of this category, but I'm still not entirely sure articles like "Goliath" or even "Eye of Odin" should be listed here unless we can make the link jump directly to the apocrypha section. We don't want people who may be newer to the Gargoyles universe being totally confused about why seemingly canon characters are in here. -- Demonskrye 10:44, 13 September 2007

That's a good idea. Can it be done? I mean, can the links be made to go directly to the Apocrypha sections of each article? Because including canon articles in the Apocrypha category just because they have an apocryphal section, is like putting them in the CiT category just because they have some CiT information. Perhaps the Apocrypha should have a sub-category "Canon articles with apocryphal information" or some less unwieldy name. -- Vaevictis Asmadi 13:08, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
That sounds sensible. But you're right that we should try to find a shorter name. "Category:Apocrypha addenda" or something? -- Supermorff 16:22, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
Is "Apocrypha in canon articles" too long? It is somewhat clearer. -- Vaevictis Asmadi 21:23, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
Labyrinth Clan also has Apocryphal information. -- Vaevictis Asmadi 21:31, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
I quite like that. Category:Apocrypha in canon articles is probably the best name we're going to come up with. By the way, I probably should have mentioned this before, but there is no way to get a link in a category to go to a section of an article. You could theoretically categorise a redirect that goes to that section, but that isn't a good idea for other reasons. -- Supermorff 22:03, 13 September 2007 (CDT)
Belatedly returning to this discussion. Since we can't put in links that go straight to the Apocrypha section of an article, I think that canon characters, items, and other things should be removed from the Apocrpypha section. Right now, the only thing that differentiates Apocrypha from canon or CiT content is being in the Apocrypha section. It doesn't have it's own text color (which I don't think it should) or a special banner (which I do think it should). If we have canon articles with some apocryphal content in them in the Apocrypha section, it gets confusing. The Goliath article has CiT content as well, but it's not listed in the CiT category. I propose that we remove any canon articles from the Apocrypha section and in most cases remove the apocryphal content from the article. If we feel it is necessary to have an article where Goliath's escapades in TGC are covered in one place, I propose we create a Goliath - The Goliath Chronicles article (and the same deal for anyone else who needs one). We can use those to link to the characters in summaries of the TGC articles, if we ever do them. We can put a link somewhere on the Goliath page saying "For a history of Goliath in the apocryphal "Goliath Chronicles", see Goliath - The Goliath Chronicles. And the same deal in reverse for the TGC Goliath article. And while we're at it, we should make a banner for Apocrypha pages, since right now, someone could easily navigate to an Apocrypha page without knowing it and only have the little Category link to tell them what's going on. -- Demonskrye 15:37, 2 April 2008 (CDT)
I'm fine with this idea, but I would prefer to add the qualifier in parentheses, rather than after a dash. So Goliath (The Goliath Chronicles), rather than "Goliath - The Goliath Chronicles". Just my preference. -- Supermorff 13:38, 3 April 2008 (CDT)
Now that I think about it Goliath (Apocrypha) would probably be even better. Then we could have a section for Goliath's history in Goliath Chronicles and one for the Marvel Comics stuff. I think that's a better option than having separate articles for each. -- Demonskrye 15:29, 3 April 2008 (CDT)
Fine. -- Supermorff 07:25, 4 April 2008 (CDT)

Starting this up as new discussion since the previous one is getting very indented.

I got the apocryphal information transfered out of three canon articles and into new apocrypha-only articles. The main articles for Goliath, Demona, and Brooklyn have all been removed from the Apocrypha category and replaced with the new articles. All three articles link to their canon counterparts and each canon article has a link to the apocryphal one at the very end of the Hostory section. There are only two canon articles left in the Apocrypha category. Eye of Odin needs a little more work because I do want to have some information about its origins in the video game in a Behind the Scenes section on the canon article. Labyrinth Clan should be quick to do, but I'd greatly appreciate it if someone could flesh out the apocrypha article a little once it's been created since it's only going to consist of one sentence. (I haven't seen most of TGC, so I can't do it myself. Once all the canon articles are out of the Apocrypha category, I'm going to try to add some anecdotes from the Disney Adventures comics and - eventually - the Marvel comics, though anyone who has easier access to the Marvel issues is welcome to do that.

A few questions. Should the apocrypha articles for the characters be moved to the Apocryphal Characters category? Or, since they're more apocryphal histories of canon characters, should we leave them where they are? Also, when we have a choice between linking to a canon article or an apocryphal one in an apocryphal article, which should we do? For example, if I'm writing Lexington (Apocrypha) and I refer to Goliath, do I link it to Goliath or Goliath (Apocrypha)? -- Demonskrye 10:46, 10 April 2008 (CDT)

Personal tools