just a note -- not sure why whoever is adding references to this article is used the pipe "|" character rather than the bullet "•" we decided on in a consensus discussion -- this should be fixed. -- Captain MKB 16:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I fixed that and the other parts to conform with the style guidelines.--Long Live the United Earth 19:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
You really know how to make a person feel appreciated for the work they put into this site, Mike. I have no idea what this "consensus" you speak of is, or when you made this decree, O Captain. Nor do I really care; I'm one of maybe three people who put the effort into going through the novels page by page and collecting all the references here... and you're not. And I find it easier, as I'm doing this involved, high detail work, to use the pipe. You don't like it, you have two choices: ban me from the site and do it yourself, or keep your anal-retentive style-over-substance snark to yourself and deal with it. --Seventy 01:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the bullet wasn't my favorite choice -- I was talked into it by other users -- other users who seem to be immune to your awful attitude.
That's why I call it a consensus -- because I am noting a policy that was decided on by a group of this site's users, and not by my self.
Why has every exchange I've ever had with you had to be dominated by this aggression? -- the first day I tried out this site you started calling me names and putting my articles up for deletion. I'm really in the dark as to why you continue to direct this attitude at me for what is turning into a number of years now. -- Captain MKB 02:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The discussion on this took place here: Forum:Votes#Media reference arrangements, as you can see CaptainMike suggested using the •s in place of the |s. The doctor, EmperorKalan and I supported that (though EmperorKalan and I both noted it's lack of convenience due to not being a keyboard character) and in his support EmperorKalan suggested the following "May I suggest we go with those (but not chide anyone for using lines, simply flag it for future clean-up)" to which I agreed and there was no further discussion.

That has since been worked into our style guide. If Seventy's extensive work was undoing that style I'd have more of a problem, but Seventy's work is almost always on undeveloped pages and so the use of the | while not maintaining a completely consistent style across the site is still providing a neat arrangement of references otherwise in line with the style-guide and actually conforming to what was discussed when we made that decision.

A thought has just occurred to me... we could make a template for the listing of references which would use the | in the coding but then generate a •. Like this: {{refs|{{class|Annapolis}}|{{pre|SS|Columbia}}|''[[dePoix]]''|[[Enterprise (NX-01)|''Enterprise'' (NX-01)]]|{{pre|ICV|Enterprise}}|{{pre|UESS|Enterprise}} ({{class|Constitution}})}} which would generate:

Annapolis-classSS ColumbiadePoixEnterprise (NX-01)ICV EnterpriseUESS Enterprise (Constitution-class)

This would make it easy to type, maintain a consistent style and allow us to instantaneously update the referencing system across the site if we ever changed our minds, again! --8of5 02:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, on that discussion I also discussed that I was worried about the difficulty of using a non-keyboard character.
I'd be worried about the refs template -- some articles are so template heavy that the templates are locked out -- there's a definite KB limit of how much data could be templatized into an article and this looks like it would break that bank in the "full" articles that have dozens upon dozens of references.
And yes, Seventy is a solid contributor. He's dedicated to the site's topic and prolific in his writing. I hate thinking that he could feel unappreciated. That being said, I wish that a simple reminder wasn't a impetus for him to start a tirade of personal insults towards me repeatedly over the past 18 months. -- Captain MKB 02:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, well glad you pointed out that potential problem before I started making a template with a couple of hundred optional fields to number :P.
I think we've all got a bit snappy at times, it very easy to take something small very personally, and different ways of working here can sometimes seem to clash when really I'm sure we all just want contribute as best we can. So ya-know, play nice everyone, we're all here for fun right? :) --8of5 02:39, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.