Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tagline"
m (FaviFake moved page Talk:tagline to Talk:Tagline: Capitalized) |
|||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:: Heh sorry bad phrasing. The text after the actual, literal statement of the tagline on this page is in the tone of an "explanation", like you would see on a comic's page. It doesn't sound like the purely objective, wikipedia-style prose that you see on some of the other more general pages. So, I was tempted to add a header to that text calling it "Explanation", to mimic the comic pages' format. But in the end, with such a short page, that would probably hurt more than it helps. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 15:14, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | :: Heh sorry bad phrasing. The text after the actual, literal statement of the tagline on this page is in the tone of an "explanation", like you would see on a comic's page. It doesn't sound like the purely objective, wikipedia-style prose that you see on some of the other more general pages. So, I was tempted to add a header to that text calling it "Explanation", to mimic the comic pages' format. But in the end, with such a short page, that would probably hurt more than it helps. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 15:14, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | :::Oh! You wanted to make a [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Section section] for it. Yes, I think this page is too short for that. Sorry for my confusion, I'm not a morning person. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]<span title="I'm an admin. I can help.">_a</span> ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 15:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ::::Ah, section, heading, same difference :) I'm too used to the ancient HTML 2.0 model haha. Yes, that is what I meant, and I agree. Really just remarking on the voice used. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 15:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 09:57, 24 July 2023
I'm tempted to add an Explanation header after the tagline proper, since the following text is clearly written with a subjective tone and is, in fact, an explanation. But on such a short page, that would look weird. - jerodast (talk) 13:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Heh sorry bad phrasing. The text after the actual, literal statement of the tagline on this page is in the tone of an "explanation", like you would see on a comic's page. It doesn't sound like the purely objective, wikipedia-style prose that you see on some of the other more general pages. So, I was tempted to add a header to that text calling it "Explanation", to mimic the comic pages' format. But in the end, with such a short page, that would probably hurt more than it helps. - jerodast (talk) 15:14, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, section, heading, same difference :) I'm too used to the ancient HTML 2.0 model haha. Yes, that is what I meant, and I agree. Really just remarking on the voice used. - jerodast (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)