Template talk:Asterix

Rogue code appearing

At bottom of the template, when in use, the following text is appearing:

{{#switch:book | b | books | book = | m | movie | movies | f | films | film = | g | games | game = |

I have no idea what it is for (even having looked at the template code). Could someone fix this please?

EdJogg 11:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the code that sorts the various articles using the template into their appropriate categories. when the template was made collapsible it stopped being treated as code and dropped into the article directly (causing all articles using the template to be placed in all categories (book,game,film & general) ... collapsible would be nice, but the damage it caused isn't worth it, so I've reverted to the (working) non-collapsible version for now ---Invisifan 15:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On closer examination it appears the when Dispenser added the collapsibility option he erased a couple of critical closing braces from the parser function - I'll rv & correct that and hopefully we'll have the best of all possible templates ;-) --Invisifan 15:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well the rogue code has certainly gone now! Thanks. EdJogg 16:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add year to volumes (like the movies)

I was thinking of adding the year to the volumes in the template (like the movies). Please let me know if you have issue with that.

Story by Goscinny

Shouldn't "How Obelix Fell..." and "Asterix and the Class Act" be in the section for stories by Goscinny? Although they were not issued in book form until after his death he was still responsible for their text content. Opera hat (talk) 10:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would agree. However, if these books are moved, they will no longer be in chronological order, so perhaps we should add the publication years? Mr. Absurd (talk) 01:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I dislike the split of the volumes into Goscinny & Uderzo alone to be artificial and poorly done as it stands. At the least the 2 books mentioned need to go into the G&U section, but SOME of the stories in Class Act are by Uderzo alone. Dates added is not a good answer either - the English edition or the French? This is the English Wikipedia after all. And the stories from the Class Act are scattered throughout the chronology.

--Invisifan (talk) 07:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And for "How Obelix...", the story was written in 1965, and the illustrations and issued book in 1989, that's a gap of 24 year years. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 12:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other material

I think there should be a section of "other material" with material not really belonging to the official album series, such as "Asterix conquers Rome" and "How Obelix fell...", it looks a little strange having them together with the main series. (Although "Uderzo" technically is correct for the Conquers book, most people would interpret it as Albert Uderzo, not Marcel Uderzo. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 12:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the French language template, they have "How Obelix..." and "Class Act" sorted as "albums hors collection", i.e. albums published outside the original series, I think that makes sense for these albums mentioned, "Conquers", "Potion" and "CA", and perhaps some additional material if there'd be articles. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 13:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]