Forum:Should we include pages on Characters?

< Forum

Should we include articles about characters from books? My personal opinion would be no. All we need is a character section on the book page, then we can add sub-headers for the most notable characters. I think this would be far better then just having random character articles which are so small it's pointless for them to have there own pages. It only makes navigation harder. Opinions? Thanks — RC-1136 ^{Hate Mail Here} 20:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, no characters. They would only be stubs and would fill the wiki with fan stuff. --Davinci - conversar 00:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the majority of characters should not have their own articles. However, there are exceptions. Two I can think of off the top of my head are

1. Key characters that span multiple books or even authors. One example would be Sherlock Holmes.
2. Separating out major characters from the primary article when there is a great deal of information developed about both. Most of our articles are not this content rich yet. But I hope at sometime we will have enough information in some of our articles that it might make sense to break out major sections into sub-articles.

-- CocoaZen 13:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree that in those cases it would probably make sense to have a seperate page, good points — RC-1136 ^{Hate Mail Here} 18:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree to only make pages for major characters of series and books, especially if they carry through different series and authors. Also, we should add a Personae Dramatis -list of characters- for each book. A suggestion I would have is to in Discussion, reserve a book to work on so two people don't end up doing a lot of work just to end up having two different lists. Also, I would suggest adding quotes from major characters or the author on the top but using the Template:Quote2 instead of Template:Quote. -- PhaethonZer0fNothing.