Forum:Book articles

Forums: Index > Watercooler > Book articles

I think the one thing most people would expect coming to this wiki is an article for each book. We've been not bad at adding these articles but the best representation has been for more recent books. Given that the series has such an important legacy it's probably disappointing for many people to come here and see so few articles relating to the early years. This has probably been the result of several factors but for my own part, I can say that I've been wary of adding articles with minimal information, and have been adding or updating based on my own reading of the books. However, there is plenty of information on each book available on the internet and I reckon we could get together at least an infobox and a sentence or two without actually having to read the book.

I'd like to propose a concerted and coordinated effort to get an article up for each book. We could break the various series' down into chunks of ten or twenty books and contributors could put their name alongside them on a list stating that they will take on the task of making sure at least a stub article is available. Everyone would work at their own pace and take on new chunks of work as they finish but this way, nobody is treading on anyone else's toes and we know that sooner rather than later, all articles will have been stubbed.

There are other things to consider - what is the minimum amount of info to start an article with etc., but I'd be interested to hear what the other contributors think - do they agree that a book article stub is preferable to a 'red link'? Is this the best way of tackling a project of this scale, etc.?

Paul Hassett 12:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

---

This is a very good idea Paul. I was thinking of starting on articles for those books myself, but an organized project is even better! You may want to check out some of the WookieeProjects on Wookieepedia, and User projects on Memory Alpha for some ideas on the layout, organization, etc. What would this project be called? The Hardy Boys Wiki:HBWikiProject Books?

And yes, stubs are better then red links, far, far better. According to Wikia, stubs are very good for young wikis, since adding to a stub is easier for new users (and even old ones) then starting an article from scratch. What is the minimum of info? Well, I think, Infobox book, the opening paragraph that has been used on just about every book article on the wiki, and brief plot summary. Also, an Appearances list is good, even incomplete since it is something just about anyone can add to.

Anyways, I think this is a great idea!

WHLfan (talk to me!) 05:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and something else that would help this project, is that if users made up a list of books they have read and/or own. I've listed all my reads on my user page, and should do it with books I own as well. I just think if we all knew what each other have read, things would run smother.

WHLfan (talk to me!) 05:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

---

I've had a look at the projects pages on Memory Alpha and Wookiepiedia and I agree, that's the sort of thing we need. As for names, I think "HBWiki" is a little redundant. I think making individual project pages subpages of a central project page (which could be added later) might keep things tidy also. So, how about: The Hardy Boys Wiki:Projects/Book stubs?

As for the minimum info for an article, I agree with you and I'd also prefer to see "to be added" under subsections rather than have headers missing because no info is available. For an example, see: tardis:Kingdom_of_Silver. One reason for this is that again, it makes pages easier to add to. Also, having a placeholder makes it easy to see what needs added to a page.

A standard appearances list would be good for each book, consisting of the link to the list of regular characters, Frank and Joe and the incomplete list template like:

Appearances

This list is incomplete, you can help The Hardy Boys Wiki by expanding it.

Characters

• Regulars
  • Frank Hardy
  • Joe Hardy

Paul Hassett 12:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

---

I like your idea about project sub pages. Should the project be limited to "Book stubs" or once we have created those stubs will the project shift it's focus to expanding those stubs?

WHLfan (talk to me!) 05:58, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

---

I think for the moment we should limit it to stubs. Once we have an article for each book, we can start other projects for things like adding book covers and detailed plot synopses separately.

What size chunks of work would be reasonable do you think? I thought ~10 pages each and we could break it down like this:

Original Series, original text, 1-10

Original Series, original text, 11-20

Original Series, original text, 21-30

Original Series, original text, 31-38

Original Series, revised text, 1-10

Original Series, revised text, 11-20

Original Series, revised text, 21-30

Original Series, revised text, 31-38

Original Series, 39-48

Original Series, 49-58

etc.

Anyway, I'm going away for the weekend now so it'll be a few days before I start on any of this.

Paul Hassett 08:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

---

Okay, looks good.

WHLfan (talk to me!) 14:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

---

I've added the page for this project and signed up and got started myself. Join in everyone!

Paul Hassett 12:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)