Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/24 task force/Manual Of Style

What to include

Feel free to add stuff that should be added to the list below, here's what I can think of for the minute:

Basic article structure guidelines, eg basic naming conventions (concept and characterization etc)
Section to address how in-universe info is handled, such as plot summaries, fictional characterization.
How to handle trivia.
Notability guideline. Something that has been vague for quite some time, I`m thinking something like, "Character had a major impact on the plot, and had coverage in the media." Obviously this will need more depth and clarity, but it`s a start.
Image use guidelines, such as image sizes and how & when images should be used.

Should have as much real world information as possible (concept and creation, casting information, production info, critical reception, etc)
Appearances section should be a very brief overview. This is NOT an episode guide and only significant scenes for that character should be mentioned. Should be no longer than four paragraphs in length.
Critical Reception should list proper sources: major websites and TV critics, not fan sites/forums.
No separate trivia sections, stuff that may seem like trivia can usually be properly integrated into the production sections.
No more than 3 images per character page (one in the infobox and two in the article). Must show significant events and not just the character talking to someone or anything.

Thoughts on above,

Perhaps we should determine some sort of rough ratio of real world/in universe info, just to get a rough guideline on content there.
I'm not too sure about the 4 paragraphs idea. It seems slightly arbitrary, and a little restrictive. It's also possibly open to gaming. What would a paragraph be defined as? I've seen "paragraphs" get rather large. I think that a sorta ratio for the article between real world and in universe info would be ideal.
We should probably give some examples of sites to avoid, as I know there are quite a few sites out there that have info in them, but aren't very good quality.
We'd need to figure out some sort of guide as to what makes an image significant. Obviously, infobox images are automatically included, as they're necessary for identification purposes, but other images need some sort of guideline as to how an image is determined to be significant, and it would have to run along the lines at what the policy says at WP:NFCC, though criterion 7 is extremely vague. Steve Crossin (talk) (contact page) 12:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]