Forums:Other writings: Difference between revisions

From Tolkien Gateway
m (Agree)
mNo edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
:I would be keen to avoid an unnecessarily long section title (I don't like "In other versions of the legendarium" as it is). I think we can grant the reader enough intelligence to read the text and understand. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 18:57, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
:I would be keen to avoid an unnecessarily long section title (I don't like "In other versions of the legendarium" as it is). I think we can grant the reader enough intelligence to read the text and understand. --{{User:Mith/sig}} 18:57, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


:Yep (we could always explain the use in a "Standards on TG"-page - perhaps it's already explained?). Then also renaming "Other versions of the legendarium" to "Other versions" is a good and logical conclusion.--[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 18:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
::Yes; we could always explain the use in a "Standards on TG"-page (perhaps it's already explained?). Then also renaming "Other versions of the legendarium" to "Other versions" is a good and logical conclusion.--[[User:Morgan|Morgan]] 18:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:00, 9 November 2011

Tolkien Gateway > Forums > Other writings


The section "Other writings" is a sort of standard on TG. Is it clear enough, or should it rather be "Other writings not of the legendarium" (or something similar)? (I'm thinking that a reader might not know what is meant in the first example by "other" - is it writings not mentioned in the article, or what?) --Morgan 20:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I would be keen to avoid an unnecessarily long section title (I don't like "In other versions of the legendarium" as it is). I think we can grant the reader enough intelligence to read the text and understand. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 18:57, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes; we could always explain the use in a "Standards on TG"-page (perhaps it's already explained?). Then also renaming "Other versions of the legendarium" to "Other versions" is a good and logical conclusion.--Morgan 18:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)