Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Narnia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Narnia, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to C. S. Lewis' Narnia universe. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
WikiProject Narnia To-do:

Hello and welcome to the Narnia WikiProject! I hope you find the project page useful, and will join the project, as well as help to make the project's organization that much better! Welcome! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] A VERY important announcment

I've streamlined the assessment process. Check out

Related categories are:

Category:Narnia articles by quality

Category:Narnia articles by importance

don't be daunted, you don't need to add the category. Just add the template with the corresponding quality and importance assessment on the article's talk page as per the examples, and it'll automatically be added to the category The method of using the template now is: {{Narnia-WP| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 16:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Shreshth, when you changed the Template, did you purposefully remove the category Category:WikiProject Narnia articles from being added to all pages with the template on it? Just curious, as there are now no pages in that category. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Yup, I did, but maybe it is a good idea, since it'll categorize all Narnia-rel articles in the same category. But then we have the Watchlist for that. Dilemma!? --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 16:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
True, I was just scared the Stub-sorting project would come along and see it empty and munch it right up. Whatever. And, can I go ahead and rate articles, or is that done by members of WP:1.0? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 16:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Anyone can rate articles Bornagain4 16:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories

Please discuss the current categories, as outlined on the project page. Some have very few articles in them and perhaps should be deleted. Personally, I think "Narnia adaptations" and "Narnia films" should be merged to become "Narnia in other media" or something like that. Suggestions? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 17:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline

Does all this stuff on "Narnian time" in articles come solely from the LWW dvd? If so, I propose an article on that with all years in Narnia articles linking to it, so as to explain this to readers. Much like the Dates in Harry Potter page for HP. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. Found this. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

What do you suggest I name this article on the timeline? Narnian timeline? Dates in The Chronicles of Narnia? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I created it at Narnian timeline. Please head over and assess! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal

I've started the Portal:Narnia. Any help getting it rid of red links and adding more content (i.e. making it pretty) is much appreciated. Thanks. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Did u put it through the portal approval process? Bornagain4 16:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
The portal approval process has since been disbanded. It is kept but tagged with the {{historical}} tag. See its MfD entry here. Even though, at the time, I was unaware of the approval process, it had already been deactivated. I whole-heartedly agree with its rejection too. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criteria for Articles

With the Narnia-Stub template being attached to many articles now, I think it would be wise to discuss some criteria for articles. There are many (a couple dozen) Narnia related articles that are 3 lines long, and that really is about all there is to say about those subjects. They are not really stubs, and I would suggest that most of them are not important enough to have seperate articles.

We have three annotated lists that could be used to capture the information in these tiny articles (in most cases this work is already done): List of Narnian creatures, List of places in The Chronicles of Narnia and List of characters in The Chronicles of Narnia.

I'm not suggesting that we remove all character/creature/places articles. Rather that we remove the ones that will always appear as stubs even when they contain all available information. LloydSommerer 12:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we could have an article such as Minor places in Narnia or something to that effect. That is, having more info than the basic stuff on the list is wrong, but they don't merit their own articles, so instead get one article to cover them all. They could also be split by location; e.g. places in Archenland, places in Narnia, places in Calormen, etc. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 16:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with LloydSommerer that permastub articles should be gathered into the lists and with Fbv65edel that the list should be restructured to be grouped logically rather than alphabetically. Eluchil404 02:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I suggest something like Minor Kings of Narnia or the like, because I keep coming across tons of articles with one sentence about the mention of this king, and then a succession box. They're endless! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm with User:Lsommerer re. the relocation of very small articles to the list pages. It would tidy up the category and if an entry in the list became large it could be split off with a link to an article of its own, so there'd be no loss of content but a reduction in the number of stubs. -- ben 06:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Since it looks like we'll be rewriting/combining/deleting articles sometime in the future, I think it would be good for all of us to be somewhat on the same page as far as how articles should look. I had not read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) until today and found it quite helpful given the tasks this project will be undertaking. Some of the Narnia articles follow these guidelines well and some obviously do not. Interestingly, it also addresses the line-of-kings articles that we've been discussing. LloydSommerer 17:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm beginning the process of redirecting places articles that are essentially complete but only a few sentences long to the List of places in The Chronicles of Narnia page. It's a fun way to pass the time, and everyone is invited to play along. Here are the things to do (as far as I can see):
I don't know if it is necessary to nominate these stubs for deletion. There is a chance that the entries will grow to a size that warrents using the article again. LloydSommerer 15:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
  • We should probably also remove the [[Category:Narnia places]] category from the page LloydSommerer 16:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Just a quick update. I went through all of the articles in Category:Narnia places and redirected stubs to List of places in The Chronicles of Narnia. I also cleaned up the category a bit by flattening the subcategories. I didn't look at all of the entries in Places or add book links, so if someone familiar with the books wants something to do, that needs to be done. LloydSommerer 00:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stubs

Please help add the stub template: {{Narnia-stub}}, to articles in the category Category:Stub-Class Narnia articles, to have same number of articles in Category:Narnia stubs. It is completely disorganized, and I'm too exhausted to do so, after re-assessing all the articles; it was a real nightmare! --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 15:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've had a go at this and the remaining ones all redirect to List of places in The Chronicles of Narnia so there isn't much else I can do with them.Starquin 12:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
On second thoughts, I changed the class of the redirects to RD, ie {{Narnia-WP | class=RD | importance = low}}. This took them off one of the lists. The two categories now differ only by one article which is List of cities in The Chronicles of Narnia which I propose to merge into List of places in The Chronicles of Narnia.Starquin 15:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Might wanna see....

I just wanted to point the general public's attention to WikiProject Military History. It is one of the best run WikiProjects and could serve as a guideline for our project. Bornagain4 02:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Example Character Article

I just created Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Character article example as a starting point for discussion of what the articles for major characters should look like. In my opinion the Peter Pevensie article was in the best shape, so I used it as a starting point. My purpose was not specifically to improve that article, but to have a spot to talk about, in general, how we want to format articles on Narnia characters.

Feel free to change the example article as you like. I don't know if it makes more sense to have discussion about changes occure here or on the discussion page for the example. Here it would get more notice. There it wouldn't clutter up the joint. Text in italics are not meant to be part of the article, but to explain the use of the example as a template for other articles. LloydSommerer 01:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

You might want to consider a character template similar to the one used in Albus Dumbledore, esp. for those characters who were portrayed in one of the movies. You'd probably want to modify it, to allow for characters who were portrayed by different people in the BBC movie and the more recent one, and maybe some different fields - but it should be a good model. --Tim4christ17 01:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I was more interested in a "template" for our character articles, rather than an "infobox". My own thought is that the information in the infoboxes should go in the paragraph describing the character. I guess I'm just not a big infobox fan. LloydSommerer 02:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I've rewritten the Narnia character template based on the character template from WikiProject Novels. There are a few changes specific to the Narnia books, and I left out a section that didn't seem to fit. Mr. Bennet a character from Pride and Prejudice is an example of that template in action. I think we're pretty close to a usable template here. What do you think? LloydSommerer 02:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The template's pretty good overall... As far as template v. Infobox thing, perhaps you should take a look at Bra'tac instead - it has a substantially different infobox. I think "at-a-glance" basic information is important, especially actors portrayals, the book/movie the character was introduced, and the character's loyalties and/or nationality. That sort of information isn't important to an article's introduction, and at the same time is going to be the first thing a person's going to look for if they're just browsing the articles and not actually reading them - hence, the infobox. As far as implementation, it shouldn't be too hard to create a simple infobox template and then insert it into your main template... --Tim4christ17 08:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Hearing no further comments, I'm going to copy the Peter Template Example to the actual Peter Pevensie article. I'm going to copy it with the InfoBox2. I'm not doing this as a defacto decision to use InfoBox2 over InfoBox1, but to get some more discussion going on the two of them. I'll direct discussion from Peter's talk page (and other pages that already have one infobox or the other --there are 2 of each total I think) to here. LloydSommerer 23:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Foreign Language

Does anyone speak a foreign language, this could be useful for translation into the language. Duh. Bornagain4 01:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Spanish - Bornagain4 at the level of 1

[edit] Navigation toolbar

WikiProject
Narnia
General information
Main project page talk
To do list talk
Assessment talk
Noticeboard talk
Watchlist talk
Sandbox talk
Project Category talk
Project Portal talk
edit · changes

I created a Navigation toolbar to be placed on all WikiProject pages. Please take a look at it, improve it, and "publish" it when it is ready. Template:Narnia Navigation Bornagain4 01:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice work. The toolbar looks sharp. Do you feel like redoing the Narnia Character/Places/Books templates? I think they need some attention; they look dated and cumbersome to me. Maybe we don't need to list every article? I don't know. LloydSommerer 22:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Um . . . I just copied WikiProject Military History's template, and have no real talent with them. Perhaps, Tim4christ17 could help with that. Bornagain4 22:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, there's no reason why that same skill set can't work for us here too! Find one that looks good and... LloydSommerer 23:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Whatever, I'll try, but the one to the right certainly needs to be improved, but I've been working on other stuff. Bornagain4 23:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I was just trying to be funny. No harm intended LloydSommerer 02:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Putting it on all the project pages has already been quite helpful to me. Nice work. LloydSommerer 05:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aslan picture, anyone?

Anyone have a Free use or Public Domain picture of Aslan we could put in the Narnia stub template? He's the most recognizable "image" of Narnia, and thought it'd be nice to do. The problem is that the only image I've found (the one on the Aslan article) is a fair use picture and we can't use fair use images in templates. --Tim4christ17 01:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

We could just put a plain picture of a lion. Bornagain4 02:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added a picture that I believe meets the requirements for a stub pic. It's not of Aslan, but it is of a lion --Tim4christ17 03:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Um, is there anyway we can crop the picture so the right side is gone, other than that, I love the picture. Bornagain4 20:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I believe it can be cropped...but I don't know how. --Tim4christ17 21:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
This is great. I have a picture for the article on Jesus. It's not a picture of Jesus, but it is of a man ;-) Anyway, I don't know that a picture of a generic lion would really add much. Can't we make a request to use a real Pauline Baynes image? I can;t believe that such a request would be refused. Leeborkman 23:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox template

I'm creating an Infobox template and a color template, both of which can be merged with the article template mentioned above. They will both be finished shortly. --Tim4christ17 21:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I've finished the templates - for now. There are currently three unused colors in it, in case someone wants to add more races to the list. Also, the colors should probably be changed a little to avoid duplication with the Stargate WikiProject. Anyone who knows hexadecimal colors can go ahead and change them some. The templates are at {{Narnia character}} and {{NarniaColor}}. You can see a preview infobox at User:Tim4christ17/Template Test. --Tim4christ17 23:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
You might recall from a few edits ago that I don't really like character infoboxes. But this one made me change my mind. Tim4christ17 did a great job of pulling in the most important information while leaving out the nitty-gritty that I think many character infoboxes throw in. Nice work. In fact, I was inspired to try to cleanup what I saw as a few minor formatting issues. I might have gotten carried away. Here is my suggestion: User:Lsommerer/NarniaCharacterInfobox LloydSommerer 09:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I like both of the infoboxes alot, they look sharp. I have a hard time picking which one I like better, but no offense Lloyd, I think I like Tim's better, BECAUSE it looks simpler, and I like simple looking. But that is just personal opinion.
Oh, and I just got an idea, we could change the Template:NarniaCharacters to a template for all humans from earth, all dwarves, mentioned in the series etc. We would put it directly under the infobox, so when someone visits the Lucy Pevensie page, right beneath the infobox is a place for a list of Kings and Queens, or of humans from earth, or something like that. Hope you catch what I mean. But I need to know how to make a template float to the right at a certain width. Just an idea. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bornagain4 (talk • contribs).
I'll have more time to catch up later today, but I think I like Lloyd's better. Tim's is a bit in your face, if you don't mind my saying so. Lloyd's is a bit more organized. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 16:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Sandbox/Infobox Comparison to compare the two infoboxes alongside text of an article, so that we can reach some consensus on these. My vote goes for Lloyd's, so long as the character's name is made bigger. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I am afraid that I am going to have to switch my vote to Lloyd's because, with Tim's there are problems with the width of the color bar. Bornagain4 13:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • We can probably take care of any general formatting problem, so don't let that be the deciding factor. I think Tim and I both would find it more useful to know what everyone likes and dislikes about each infobox. This isn't so much about choosing as it is about getting to one that we think works well for what we want to do. Having said that, choosing is a much faster solution, so maybe picking the one that is closest and working from there isn't really out of line either. We're really a prety small group here, perhaps throwing one infobox on Lucy and the other on Peter and getting some feedback from others would be good too. Finally, NarniaCharacterInfobox2 has some useful information on its talk page. LloydSommerer 15:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • The thing I like about Lloyd's is that it's neat and organized. With all due respect to Tim, his infobox just sort of lists things as they appear. Lloyd's also seems a bit more concise. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyone else want to chime in? If not then I think the next step would be to move NarniaCharacterInfobox2 to Template:Narnia character and replace the infobox on the three characters that currently use that infobox. LloydSommerer 03:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Is this template going to use the color scheme that Tim suggested? Bornagain4 13:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
It currently does. I don't know that it needs too. It's a cool trick, but I don't know that it is necessary when we're talking about maybe 20 main characters total. LloydSommerer 18:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to update the 3 pages that use what I'm now going to call the "old" infobox with the new infobox. I'm leaving the colors as they are. It will be trivial to update them once we decide what they should be. LloydSommerer 14:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Good. Bornagain4 21:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narnia WP on redirects

I'm not sure what the convention is, but I've noticed that as we redirect more articles to lists, we've removed {{Narnia-WP}} from the talk page. The article should still be watched, in case somebody changes the redirect or whatever. Plus, the article still is part of the Narnia WP, even though it has no content. Does that make sense? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 17:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

What quality and importance should go on these pages? The reason I took them off was that I couldn't decide. I can start putting them back on once that is determined. LloydSommerer 18:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Erm… I know it's rather nonstandard, but perhaps we can build a function into the template noting that it is a redirect? I'm pretty bad with templates, so perhaps somebody else can do it? Good point though. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
We could do something like {{Narnia-WP | class = NA | importance = NA}}, which will make it non-applicable importance and class. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 06:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, how does this sound? I added a category for redirected articles to the quality assessment portion of {{Narnia-WP}}. I'm not an expert on templates and may have made a mistake; please take a look. I realize that quality is not really the right term, but it is also how you designate Non Article pages, which these are. To use this new designation, you'd do this:

{{Narnia-WP|class=RD|importance=low}}

I would assume that all pages that are being redirected will be of low importance, but you can give it other priority ratings if you see the need (or we can do something completely different). This may require the upward migration of articles that are currently rated as low priority, as that class will see a large influx of articles. Articles with the RD classification are added to Category:Redirected Narnia articles which is a subcategory of Category:Non-article Narnia pages. LloydSommerer 15:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Further discussion on this topic is taking place at Narnia-WP. LloydSommerer 22:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I have added {{Narnia-WP|class=RD|importance=low}} to all of the articles that were redirected to a list recently. LloydSommerer 15:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox Idea

I have created a template for PC characters on my userspace to place beneath the infobox that was discussed above. It will replace Template:NarniaCharacters that goes on the bottom of the page. The problem is that if one puts the template on Trumpkin's page, it would need to be green. But if you put it on Miraz's page, it would need to be another color. Please tell me what you think of the template, and what we can do about the problem. Bornagain4 18:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I like this idea, but I can see some problems too. I like that it would replace Template:NarniaCharacters which seems tacky to me sitting as it does at the bottom of pages (I know this is a matter of taste). And I think this is a logical place for that information. I do not see that the color is an issue. We can decide on a single color to use and use that throughout. Color coding is a neat idea, but I don't think we really gain anything as far as usability or providing information, so, if it gets in the way of something more important, I would say remove it. The problem I see is that most of our characters appear in more than one book, and having the infobox be book based would mean needing more than one on a page. LloydSommerer 19:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Not all the infoboxes are by book. I have created another template for Narnians from England. And if we decide that we will not use the color coding, we ought to decide what color we use at the List of Colors. Bornagain4 20:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narnia Sandbox?

Since we're currently experimenting with a lot of example articles, templates and infoboxes, would it be a good idea to have a Narnia-WP sandbox were these things could be collected and discussed? It would not be very different from what we are doing now, but would allow people to move projects from user pages once they are ready to get feedback on ideas. The sandbox would essentially be a page to list the projects which would then be subordinate pages to that. LloydSommerer 19:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I love the idea, lets create it. Bornagain4 20:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Created: Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Sandbox Bornagain4 21:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Beruna Ford

The book does not go into detail about the battle, though the movie takes quite a few liberties because of its visual necessity. How do we think this should be approached in the article, and the infobox? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I say that we stick to the book for the main article, but perhaps a separate section entitled "Diferences between the book and the movie" or something like that. But the book should take priority. Bornagain4 01:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I would suggest that whatever we do, we do it consistantly with all of the articles. This problem will only get worse in the following years. While I would perfer to ignore the movies when they differ from the books, I don't think that will work. My own, admittedly spur of the moment, suggestion would be to treat the movie as a seperate source, much the same way that we seperate out the various books in the Example Character Article. After a section headed "In The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" we would have one headed "In the 2005 film The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe". That way future editors know what goes where and we are consistant within the various Narnia articles. A different possibility is simply to note that the differences between the book and film are available in the film article. The info box is tougher and suggests that perhaps the best answer for this battle is to have two seperate articles (or perhaps two seperate infoboxes). Anyone know what The Lord of the Rings people do? LloydSommerer 01:37, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject Middle-earth has the book article not mention the movie, and the movie article has a section for differences. The article on Saruman has a section on his biography and a separate section for portrayals in adaptions. Bornagain4 01:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I created Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone all the way through Order of the Phoenix, so that's not a problem for me. However, in the article itself, the infobox gets cut back quite a bit. I think the way I'll do it is to use only book info for the infobox, and have a section for the movie's interpretation of it. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I've finished my adoption! Check it out. Battle of Beruna Ford – Done! Check it out. old version new version diff diff without text that stretches the page --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Question: Why does the article say Jadis's army fled for a thousand years? I didn't see that in the timeline. Bornagain4 13:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template Colors

I have created a navigation template at Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Sandbox/Navigation Template, the only thing left to add is color. I picked some, but I would appreciate other input. The colors we choose for this should be the colors for this WikiProject that we can use for standard on infoboxes. We should probably decide this factor now about the infoboxes.

Tim4christ17 has done a marvelous job creating a template that can change infobox colors depending on character race. My question is whether or not it is practical to do so. If we do not use his idea, we should pick colors to use on infoboxes. Input is desired. Bornagain4 01:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Note - the color template can fairly easily be changed to work on things other than the race/nationality that it is currently doing. --Tim4christ17 22:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To Do list

There are obviously lots of things to be done to the various Narnia pages, but I am not familiar enough with WikiProjects to know just what should go on the To Do list. I'm sure there are some things that at least would need to be discussed before adding them. With that in mind, I'm going to start a list of Potential things to do on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Narnia/to do. If that is the wrong place, feel free to move it. LloydSommerer 15:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charn

Not sure where to bring this, but the entire article is, at present, without sources other than book text; the Commentary section especially needs this, as I've mentioned on the talk page. -- nae'blis 20:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal

It's already on there, but nobody's really done anything with it, and now it's been sitting there for about three and a half weeks just dead as the White Witch. The only thing which needs to be done is create the list of Narnia topics, but make sure you take a look at some of the other Portals to get an idea of what it's supposed to look like. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Um the white witch isn't exactly dead, but I have been extremely busy with school starting, but i'll try to start working a little more. Bornagain4 23:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Er, then what is she? My LWW says (beginning of ch. 17) "and when those who were still living saw that the Witch was dead…" But I understand, school is starting up pretty soon here too. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Reference in PC says that witches never die and a hag and werewolf almost call her up, not like its important to the portal or anything :) Bornagain4 21:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
True, true. :-) --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narniainterest template

Oopsies, I thought that by putting ~~<includeonly>~~</includeonly><noinclude>~~</noinclude> on the {{Narniainterest}} template, it would automatically include your signature. Sigh, I guess not. Therefore, note to do put your signature when using this template. Sorry. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, it does. You just have to make sure that you subst this template. Without subst: 'ing it, it doesn't do it. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer Review?

Since adopted articles are starting to be finished, should we start a peer review in this WikiProject? Not anything elaborate, but just enough to point out rough spots that could be fixed. What do you think? Bornagain4 18:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I think its a good idea. I dont think there's much I can add to Coriakin for example but I still feel its a bit rough.I'd appreciate some feedback or tips, being a new editor.Starquin 20:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
It is not that bad, it could use some more work. Check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Character article example to see how to improve it more. Bornagain4 02:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it's a good idea too, but I'm new to the peer review process. Could someone point me at an example or guidelines? LloydSommerer 03:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipeidia has a peer review process located at Wikipedia:Peer Review, if we did do a peer review for our project it would be one of the smallest peer reviews that there are. I am beginning to think that it is not a good idea, we could use Wikipedia's, because we would probably get better feedback. So . . . input please. Bornagain4 13:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seven Lords of Narnia

Howdy all,

I've created a page on The Seven Great Lords of Narnia after writing the bulk of it in Dawn Treader and realising it didn't fit. I thought some of you may have made or edited pages with reference to them as characters, so just to let you know there's now somewhere to link to.

I could also use a hand citing sources for this page, if anyone knows how this should be done (or where the right FAQ is!) I'd be very grateful for some guidance. Curiousbadger 13:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Curiousbadger, nice work on the article. You could try WP:HARV and WP:CITE to start you off, and you can pull the correct citations from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Character article example. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice - will take a look at those pages this afternoon and put the citations into the page (and a few other pages I've edited too). Curiousbadger 12:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists

I have merged List of cities in The Chronicles of Narnia into List of places in The Chronicles of Narnia. Since nothing links to the redirect I think it should be deleted. Incidently, this should also complete the Stubs to do as the number of stubs now equal the number of stub class articles. (Not sure if this would have been better under the Stubs heading above)Starquin 11:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joining

I was invited by the user Bornagain4 to join this project. I would be delighted to due to my interest in Narnia but I am not quite sure what my responisbilities would be... I do enjoy analyzing books and I own 'The Magical Worlds of Narnia,' which could be used as a reference, but I am not sure that I would be able to contribute on a regular basis. If helping to clean up articles, adding to them, or creating one every once and while is enough, then I would like to join. --Romulus 16:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

There is no quota for what you have to do. Just helping clean up is a great help and will be welcome. Check out our to-do list or just find a Narnia article and help improve it, it really doesn't matter. Just having you on board would be helpful. If you are going to join, add your name to the list of participants. Bornagain4 16:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


Thanks--Romulus 21:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narnia/Narnia (country)

There was a discussion about this a little while ago, but I don't remember where it was. So: there was some question whether to make Narnia a redirect to The Chronicles of Narnia, and merge the content from Narnia into Narnia (country). I thought it was just fine as it was (apparently some people searching for the series just typed 'Narnia' into the search bar and got the current article). However, I started thinking and thought that the Narnia (country) article is in need of quite a bit of work, and it seems to just stand on its own. I think it's actually better placed in the Narnia article. What does everybody think? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 04:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree as Narnia seems to be far more what I'd expect to see if I clicked on Narnia (country). Starquin 12:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree, the two articles seem as though they would be more useful as one whole Wikipedia entry. It might be an idea to put something in the initial paragraph about the entry Narnia (country) and where to find it though, in case people get to the page by searching on the word Narnia. Curiousbadger 13:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
When we originally split Narnia (country) from Narnia it was because the Narnia article was (and still is) about the entire universe (or multiverse if you prefer) in which The Chronicles of Narnia take place. I believe it is still useful and logical to be able to make that distinction. The Narnia (country) article could use a lot of work, but so could Archenland. Calormen seems to be in the best shape of the lot. If we pull Narnia (country) back into Narnia then I think for consistency we should do the same for the other countries (as they will all end up with approximately the same amount of information).
The proposal to redirect Narnia to The Chronicles of Narnia and move the content of Narnia came about because of a problem that we share with Harry Potter. Should the obvious thing to search for (in their case) direct you to the series or to the character? Or in our case, to the series or the universe? They have chosen, I believe correctly, to direct the obvious search term to the series. The Lord of the Rings has a similar, if somewhat more obscure "problem" and also direct to the series. The idea is that you don't surprise the searcher. These two topics (merging and moving content) aren't really related, and can be decided separately. LloydSommerer 23:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I say we keep the Narnia page as it is with a note in italics to an if you wanted. I believe we should merge the two articles also, because we can always make redirects to a spot somewhere down the page. Bornagain4 16:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved Narnia to Narnia (world), and merged in content from Narnia (country) to the (world) article. I decided to make it (world) because it was also about the other lands; that is, Calormen, Archenland, etc., as well. Narnia is now a redirect to The Chronicles of Narnia, which has a link to the dab page. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 21:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inline citations and referencing

I've been reading the citing sources page and was wondering if there's any consensus for the Narnia pages on how to go about citing references? As the project aim is to eventually get all articles to Featured Article standard and it appears the inline style of referencing is a requirement for FA status (can anyone verfiy this?) it would seem a good idea to use this format consistently on all Narnia pages. Any other thoughts? Curiousbadger 13:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

There was some discussion on the character template page, Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Character article example#References and it would seem that Wikipedia:Harvard referencing is preferred. Starquin 16:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Harvard referencing is what we've been using on the Narnia pages for most of a year now. Before then they were usually no citations. FA Status requires inline citation, but does not require a certain style of inline citation, so we should be fine. LloydSommerer 23:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Illustrations from the books?

Hi, I'd love to see Pauline Baynes illustrations used in book articles instead of images from the movie. Is there some copyright issue standing in the way? Has this been over-discussed before? Leeborkman 01:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It would be acceptable if following WP's fair use guidelines. I suggest you read them over -- if they are important to document the subject in question, and they are attributed to Pauline Baynes and the book in which they were published, then it's all right. I think the reason the film images are currently in use is because they're much easier to access -- scanning in book illustrations is weary work. However, if we do get the illustrations on, I wouldn't want them to replace film images, but, rather, act alongside them. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The question for me comes down to this: Can we use the images from the books only to "comment on" the images (which is clearly within the scope of fair use) or do we have the broader right to use the images from the book to "comment on" the book? We don't ever discuss the images in the articles, but the images are part of the book, and we do discuss the books as a whole and the characters depicted in the images. This is a different issue from the movie images because the movie images are all promotional matterials that were distributed to be redistributed. Notice that we don't have any screen captures from the movies (though you could certainly include those on the movie page). LloydSommerer 16:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I really couldn't answer this. Better ask one of the powers that be for an official answer. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration of the Month

I think it may be time to start up a collaboration of the month. We can put the finished collaboration on the Portal. Questions, Comments, ?Bornagain4 03:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Should we pick something that's nearly GA, or something that needs a lot of work? LloydSommerer 03:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it's a good idea. Probably better start off with something that's nearly GA, and if we do well we can do something that needs some more work. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that The Chronicles of Narnia is (a) in good shape and (b) is probably our main entry point. I'd nominate it for our first collaboration. LloydSommerer 03:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
This is a really good idea; I agree with LloydSommerer that The Chronicles of Narnia should be our first collaboration, and consequently, our first GA/FA. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 04:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

We've been rather quiet lately, any more thoughts on a CotM? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] unified navigation template

I spent a little time putting together a single navigation template for the "most important" Narnia pages. The colors are terrible, because I picked them. But even making allowances for that I'm still not sure I like it. Maybe some of the links (or evenwhole categories of links) are not necessary. Anyway, if you want to take a look or take a shot at improving it you can find it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Sandbox/Unified NarniaBox. Just remember it should only have the most important links. I already tried it with every link and it didn't work. The three small links in the upper left won't work until it is in the Template namespace, and I didn't italicize the title because it made it hard to read (with the color and boldness). LloydSommerer 18:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

It looks really good, and is as concise as just one of our current templates. I like the second one, as there aren't as many creatures, but if we can add in some more creatures, I'd keep them separate. If you don't mine, I'm going to be bold and make that template the "Narnia topics" section of the Portal, so we can finally finish it up, but that can always be reverted. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I put it on Portal:Narnia/Narnia topics, but so that the {{Tnavbar}} works, we're basically just going to have to replace the links to the portal subpage to the template whenever it moves to the template namespace. Hope that made some sense. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I like the second one much more than the first. Is the right name for this "Narnia Navigation" or something else? I'm inclined to go ahead and replace the other NavBoxes with this one if noone objects. LloydSommerer 03:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal selected article

While we're at imporving articles, we also need to decide on a selected article of the month for October for the Portal, and create it at Portal:Narnia/Selected article October 2006. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 12:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Because there was no response in over a week, I decided to create the page I just adopted, Battle of Beruna Ford as the selected article. We are welcome to negotiate that as we so choose. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA nomination

After working on sourcing, I am seriously considering nominating Skandar Keynes for GA status, but would like a few critical eyes to check it out first. It's short but there isn't alot of non-trivial stuff to say and the last thing that GA reviewers like to see are Trivia or Quotes sections. Eluchil404 10:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Glad to see some activity here, it's been a month. I'll look over it and support your nomination, if you like. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 12:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I just looked it over, and, while it's not full of random bits of trivia and the like, it is short, regardless. However, I'm happy to try it out and see what the WP GA has to say. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 12:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
  • User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
  • User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 14:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New draft page for minor characters!

Come check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Narnia/Sandbox/Minor characters in The Chronicles of Narnia where I have started to create a draft page for minor character in Narnia who don't deserve a full article, necessarily, but don't need to be smacked down to the ranks of a list. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 21:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Do you think 'minor character' is the best term to use? To me that suggests a character that is easily overlooked, and mostly just provides background colour, such as Aunt Letty, the Bulgy Bears, or the giant nurse. The Beavers, Cornelius and Jewel are all far more significant. How about 'supporting character'?

Oh, and the infobox still says 'major character in'. But generally, good idea. Chris Thornett 00:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I was really going more for the distinction between 'a random character who's in the novels so we include them on this long list' and 'a character important enough to the story to get a paragraph or two, but not a full article.' We can always making it supporting, if there's consensus. But I see what you mean about the infobox… --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I think this is a good idea, but I question putting a bunch on infoboxen in the article. To me an infobox is useful to get a quick summary of the information. When there is only a paragraph or two of information, I don't think it's necessary. LloydSommerer 02:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
We can discuss this, but I just did it to get the names down of who I think belongs on the page. It still is kind of a "quick facts" things, which abstracts the information from the prose to list form. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Narnian timeline -- FLC

Narnian timeline is currently a candidate for a featured list! Check out the article, and assess whether you thinnk it deserves to be featured or not. Then go discuss at WP:FLC! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 21:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Narnian timeline has now been promoted to featured list status! Our first milestone, congrats everybody! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 18:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Narnia_6115.html"