Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Evangelion Staff"
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
It's been 14 years now. Wow. Anyway, I've been wondering to myself if it makes sense to keep the stubby current articles the way they are - with proper references added, of course - or whether to combine a large number of them into something like a "Minor Evangelion Staff" page? Does anyone have any ideas? --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] ([[User talk:UrsusArctos|talk]]) 18:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC) | It's been 14 years now. Wow. Anyway, I've been wondering to myself if it makes sense to keep the stubby current articles the way they are - with proper references added, of course - or whether to combine a large number of them into something like a "Minor Evangelion Staff" page? Does anyone have any ideas? --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] ([[User talk:UrsusArctos|talk]]) 18:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Idk. Do what you want, I have no ideas and preferences in this instance. [[User:Zusuchan|Zusuchan]] ([[User talk:Zusuchan|talk]]) 10:04, 7 June 2021 (UTC) | :Idk. Do what you want, I have no ideas and preferences in this instance. [[User:Zusuchan|Zusuchan]] ([[User talk:Zusuchan|talk]]) 10:04, 7 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::The trouble is that I can't decide what to do myself. I understand a scenario in which it would make sense to give even these relatively minor staff their own pages and references, but I also recognize the possibility that it might be overkill. And from yet another angle, these are very minor pages that are there to help complete far larger pages of their own, and are extremely unlikely to be looked up by most people since these names can simply be searched for online, with far better information available on other sites. If someone else had their two cents, it'd be of great help to me in sorting this out. --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] ([[User talk:UrsusArctos|talk]]) 11:05, 7 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
| + | :::I guess you could just make a "Minor Staff" page, then, would save time. [[User:Zusuchan]] ([[User talk:Zusuchan|talk]]) 22:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 22:26, 7 June 2021
I'm considering renaming this into "Evangelion cast and crew" or maybe "Gainax staff". --V 17:12, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- "Gainax staff" sounds like it might work -- but then you run into the "Gainax vs. Khara" problem. --Reichu 18:34, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- What's Khara?--V 18:35, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- The Studio who's responsible for producing Rebuild --Ornette 18:38, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- Also, Gainax has created many, many other shows than just Eva. "Cast and crew" gets my vote. --Dr. Nick 18:42, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- What happens when non-Japanese cast and crew (coughADVcoughMangaEntcough) start showing up? --Reichu 18:59, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- They get "Category:Cast and Crew" (everyone gets that) then the additional "Category:ADV Films staff"--V 21:43, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
- ADV Films? What happened to Manga Entertainment? --Reichu 21:46, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
Combining articles or leaving them separate?
It's been 14 years now. Wow. Anyway, I've been wondering to myself if it makes sense to keep the stubby current articles the way they are - with proper references added, of course - or whether to combine a large number of them into something like a "Minor Evangelion Staff" page? Does anyone have any ideas? --UrsusArctos (talk) 18:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Idk. Do what you want, I have no ideas and preferences in this instance. Zusuchan (talk) 10:04, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- The trouble is that I can't decide what to do myself. I understand a scenario in which it would make sense to give even these relatively minor staff their own pages and references, but I also recognize the possibility that it might be overkill. And from yet another angle, these are very minor pages that are there to help complete far larger pages of their own, and are extremely unlikely to be looked up by most people since these names can simply be searched for online, with far better information available on other sites. If someone else had their two cents, it'd be of great help to me in sorting this out. --UrsusArctos (talk) 11:05, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- I guess you could just make a "Minor Staff" page, then, would save time. User:Zusuchan (talk) 22:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- The trouble is that I can't decide what to do myself. I understand a scenario in which it would make sense to give even these relatively minor staff their own pages and references, but I also recognize the possibility that it might be overkill. And from yet another angle, these are very minor pages that are there to help complete far larger pages of their own, and are extremely unlikely to be looked up by most people since these names can simply be searched for online, with far better information available on other sites. If someone else had their two cents, it'd be of great help to me in sorting this out. --UrsusArctos (talk) 11:05, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
