Topic on Talk:Qualitipedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Do we really need to list sequels and prequels in the infotables?

4
DeadPixel (talkcontribs)

One of my biggest problems with this is the way the word “prequel” is used. A prequel is a film that was released after a film from the same franchise, but takes place before the events of the previous film. For example, Star Wars episodes I-III were released after episodes IV-VI. Many people on these wikis are getting this wrong, however. For example, on the Greatest Movies Wiki, Shrek is listed as a prequel to Shrek 2. Yes, Shrek takes place before Shrek 2, but it also came out before Shrek 2. The right word to use here is “predecessor,” not “prequel.”

Another problem is that people will count the next film from the same studio as a sequel, even if it’s from a different franchise. For example, the Greatest Movies Wiki lists A Bug’s Life as a sequel to Toy Story. Just because they’re both from Pixar, doesn’t mean they’re from the same franchise.

I just think we should stop putting this stuff in the infotables. Wikipedia doesn’t do that. They either just mention the sequel in the intro paragraph or just make a whole header about sequels, prequels, and spin-offs.

Money12123 (talkcontribs)

I still think that it should be in the infobox because while Wikipedia doesn't do it, that's because they add a lot more information. On reception wikis, it's more beneficial to just add a part to the infobox. Otherwise though, I agree with you, and I think that the "prequel" in the infobox should be changed to "previous game" on the game wikis, "previous film" on the movie wikis and "previous book" on the literature wikis.

DeadPixel (talkcontribs)

So then what’s wrong with just putting sequel and prequel information in the intro paragraphs?

Money12123 (talkcontribs)

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. In that case, yeah, we should remove it from the infobox.