Talk:Women eligible for 2009 SF Awards: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Madeline F (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Thanks for making this page! I was thinking about it, but I've always thought the title was unwieldy, so I was holding back to see if something better appeared. Alas, I think '''Works by Women eligible for 2009 SF Awards''' is also too long. | :Thanks for making this page! I was thinking about it, but I've always thought the title was unwieldy, so I was holding back to see if something better appeared. Alas, I think '''Works by Women eligible for 2009 SF Awards''' is also too long. | ||
:When I was nominating for the Hugos this year, it was enormously helpful to have everything on the same page, so I could | :When I was nominating for the Hugos this year, it was enormously helpful to have everything on the same page, so I could scroll down looking at titles names etc while opening other tabs to search out specifics. There were tabs everywhere; huge mess; would have been even tougher with two pages for the list. So I enormously favor having only one page for everything. | ||
:How about '''Women and works of 2008'''? The | :How about '''Women and works of 2008'''? The "SF" part is a given from this being on the FemSF wiki, and the "awards" part is a bit misleading since some of these works we wouldn't recommend for an award.--[[User:Madeline F|Madeline F]] 03:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
--[[User:Madeline F|Madeline F]] 03:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
:: I like '''Women and works of 2008''' because it is short and gets the point across. The page intro will explain about being awards-eligible. Anyway, I vote shortness over precision, though Laura might disagree. I also like it being one big long page preferring to scroll & search, rather than click & switch; it's easier on the hands. - --[[User:Liz Henry|Liz Henry]] 16:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
::: Point taken. I made a separate page, but I could port everything on the Works page over here easily enough. I guess we should have that page redirect to the new page, but I have no the slightest clue how to do that. The only reason I would argue for keeping the awards bit in the title is for folks who find the page through Google. It's very clear about the purpose of the page. Obviously all of these thigs would be nominated, but they ''could'' all be. [[User:Ktempest|Tempest]] 18:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 10:17, 2 April 2008
Alternate Name For Page
Can we possibly make this page two different pages? I'm thinking that it might be more useful to have an associated page called Works by Women eligible for 2009 SF Awards. Mainly because there are more categories where a work is up for consideration, not the author herself. Women eligible for awards can focus on those awards that nominate the author or artist individually. The Campbell not-a-Hugo, for instance, or Fan Writer, Best Artist.
Or perhaps we can keep all of this information on the same page but change the title reflect that it's a list of works and individuals eligible. --Tempest 20:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for making this page! I was thinking about it, but I've always thought the title was unwieldy, so I was holding back to see if something better appeared. Alas, I think Works by Women eligible for 2009 SF Awards is also too long.
- When I was nominating for the Hugos this year, it was enormously helpful to have everything on the same page, so I could scroll down looking at titles names etc while opening other tabs to search out specifics. There were tabs everywhere; huge mess; would have been even tougher with two pages for the list. So I enormously favor having only one page for everything.
- How about Women and works of 2008? The "SF" part is a given from this being on the FemSF wiki, and the "awards" part is a bit misleading since some of these works we wouldn't recommend for an award.--Madeline F 03:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- I like Women and works of 2008 because it is short and gets the point across. The page intro will explain about being awards-eligible. Anyway, I vote shortness over precision, though Laura might disagree. I also like it being one big long page preferring to scroll & search, rather than click & switch; it's easier on the hands. - --Liz Henry 16:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- Point taken. I made a separate page, but I could port everything on the Works page over here easily enough. I guess we should have that page redirect to the new page, but I have no the slightest clue how to do that. The only reason I would argue for keeping the awards bit in the title is for folks who find the page through Google. It's very clear about the purpose of the page. Obviously all of these thigs would be nominated, but they could all be. Tempest 18:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)