This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.WarwickshireWikipedia:WikiProject WarwickshireTemplate:WikiProject WarwickshireWikiProject Warwickshire articles
Some of the sections have a lot of headings. I am not sure what is the best format. I started formating a list of headings and stopped half way though pending more ideas. Snowman (talk) 21:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but to start with I went for an easily read format. I originally considered just writing everything into the text, but then thought that may make it hard-going to read, and more difficult to pick out specific information. I'll give it some more thought also. --RedSunset22:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it could be harder to read in prose format too. For the section on "properties" the wiki has a photo for nearly every property, so a table would could include key information, key dates, and an image. There might be one or two properties without its own a page, but stubs would be easy to make to complete the set. Alternatively, each property could have its on third level heading and details expanded, but keeping the separate articles for each house. Snowman (talk) 23:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's a tricky one to get the balance right – I consciously held back on some of the details of each property since most of them already have their own pages, (and as you say, the others can be stubbed) and much of the information would be repeated. Otherwise, I like the idea of third level expansions and would prefer to go that way for the comprehensiveness of the article. A consise table format might work – maybe a little experimenting in a sandbox is in order to see what it looks like in context. On the other hand; the article is about the Trust itself, not its properties, so too much detail ought to be avoided. I can see 'for' and 'against' arguments for both and am completely undecided. --RedSunset18:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
