Adventure Time Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Adventure Time Wiki

20100401212842!Wiki.png

Forums: Index > Help desk > Trivia
Wikia's forums are a place for the community to discuss subjects with other members. Remember sign your post with four tildes: ~~~~
Forum newClick here to edit page



Back when Wikipedia decided to get rid of trivia sections, I didn't like the idea. After all, the trivia section was often one of the most interesting parts of the article.

However, I now understand why they did it. When a trivia section exists, it encourages users to add basically any random thought that pops into their head, without actually thinking about whether it should be there. Further, long trivia sections are hard to read because they're just a big, unorganized list.

Now, I'm not suggesting we get rid of trivia sections. But I am suggesting that we start trimming some of them down.

For pages with very long trivia sections (mostly episode and main character pages), I think we should start creating certain new sections and moving some trivia to those sections. For example, for episode pages, create a new section called "Production" and move all behind-the-scenes info about the episode's production and broadcast out of "Trivia" and to the new section. Other common sections might be "Continuity errors" and "Cultural references". Now, I'm not suggesting these sections be made for every article, only for pages where they're needed and where it will help organize the trivia section.

As an example, I will try it out on the article: Holly Jolly Secrets Part II Let me know what you think. Compare this to how the trivia section looked in the old version of the page.

Any thoughts? If this is a good idea, I'd like help from you guys to implement it on more articles. --Cornprone 10:17, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a pretty good idea to me. Some trivia sections have the same information twice, for example, and are a bit too long. I like what you did on the Holly Jolly Secrets article, it looks pretty neat. I am not in favour of removing or even slimming down all the trivia sections. But integreating them in other parts of the article seems like something that might work. I'm pretty lazy myself so I won't volunteer to do it, btw. :) Marcaline 11:13, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
PS: I don't believe it to be neccesary per se, but it's not a bad idea. Marcaline 11:13, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
The idea is good per se, but may be too much hassle to rearrange all the articles... Kasumisty 12:02, February 5, 2012 (UTC)Kasumisty
Well, if no one actually objects to what I'm doing, I'm going to keep doing it on episode articles that have overly long trivia sections. If anyone else would like to work on this project, let me know. Thanks. --Cornprone 22:43, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
I'm all for it, some of the Trivia on this wiki are cringe worthy and even the AT Staff has pointed out the mistakes. This is mainly trivia that just repeats what the article section already stated, and some that are just clearly wide based assumptions, it almost leads into fanfiction territory. I tried to clean up the trivia for the "Henchmen" episode because half of it really had no importance and was obvious to the viewer and reader, but it was reverted. Later it was edited again by a User who (surprisingly) had a similar view to my own, it was again reverted, both of these incidences were by User:Ice finn, who didn't contribute to the page prior.
Another example is Princess Bubblegum trivia, some can be in article and others can be removed or even placed on different pages. I kept Betty's trivia short and to the point, it was done because it can't really fit into the article unless I make a new section, nearly eliminating the trivia completely. -- Bunai82 (talk) 22:56, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, "cringe worthy" is a good description for some of it. Right now, I'm using the following subsection titles:
Cultural references
Episode connections
Continuity errors
Production notes
Storyline analysis
However, I am only creating any of these sections if there are at least two legit trivia points to go into it. --Cornprone 23:52, February 5, 2012 (UTC)
I like this idea and agree with the fact that some trivia sections are just too darn long (Finn looks like it totes needs some organization). I took a quick look at the Holly Jolly Secrets (II) page, and the organization definitely looks better. I like my work area neatly organized, and this new policy-to-be concurs with that. I also don't think that the information in the trivia section should be reduced, unless there are redundancies or overt fan speculations or statements too trivial to belong in it.
Those subsection titles also look pretty good. You have my support for this. Spartan-112|(Mailbox)(Service Vitae)(Editcount) 00:07, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
Now that I see how the reorganised sections look, I'm totally pro this idea. It's way more clean! Kasumisty 11:59, February 6, 2012 (UTC)Kasumisty
Advertisement