Standardizing Example Formatting

I would like to propose implementing a standardization for examples on trope pages. The majority of examples are formatted haphazardly, which affects readability and crosswicking, as tropes need to be reformatted for what page they are on.

When I'm talking about readability, I specifically find it easier to read tropes in the "Work: Example" format. When looking at an idented list I find it easier to read neatly organized and formatted like such:

• Work A: Example
• Work B: Example
• Work C: Example
• Work D: Example

Instead of:

• In Work C, example
• Work B: Example,
• This is subverted in Work D
• In the location Work A,

What i'm proposing would save people time and effort, and help futureproof the site and makes it easily readable.

I'd also like to propose a rewording of the American and Commonwealth Spellings page to be more clear on what exactly it is, as my understanding of it is that it is for grammmar and spelling between countries e.g. color vs colour, 3 vs three, as constantly changing small things like that can lead to edit warring.

I am proposing for this just making it clearer that it is for grammar and spelling, not formatting, as people are getting confused on what the difference is, and starting to apply the rule to mean not adjusting a trope example for any reason, even if it helps makes the entry flow better, more clear, etc.

The Work: Example format is already the standard. It's not a formal policy that I'm aware of, but should be used in preference to other styles. It will also help if/when we get around to moving the site over to a more database-friendly format.

The point of American and Commonwealth Spellings is simple: that style is first come, first served. Nobody is allowed to take it upon themselves to decide which style should be used on an article if an existing style is present.

Yes, this can result in articles looking inconsistent, but... oh well.

Edited by Fighteer on May 4th 2024 at 3:13:41 PM

So everything’s already fine then. I didn’t need to make this, ok thanks then. I was having some issues here and was told here that if I wanted to formally change things to me make a thread about it.

I'm not sure I get the difference between something being the standard and something being the norm. Does it being the standard means it's okay to change current examples to enforce that standard?

Standard is mandatroy, the norm is not, as far as I define them. Last time I've checked there is no standard example formatting on trope pages, as long as the first wick is the work.

I do love standards, but nobody is going to go through nearly half of the website to reformat entries.

Edited by Amonimus on May 4th 2024 at 3:45:00 PM

I don't want to fight about language. When I say "standard", I mean it's how we want examples to be formatted. But as Amonimus correctly states, we don't want to run around the site fixing every single example to conform with that standard. It's not worth the effort.