Talk:List of Spy × Family characters

Just need help touching up this page

I am not a native English speaker so my wording can be awkward and not natural. Can anyone help me proofread? - Theodorethebear (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Anya article?

Anya has quite a lot of notability, so should we begin making a draft for her character? HiGuys69420 (talk) 14:35, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

If you find those sources I can't see what not. Tintor2 (talk) 16:17, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

wp:self

"Neutral cross-references, e.g. (See also Cymric cat.), are permissible (and best done with the {{crossreference}} template), but are often best reworded (The Cymric cat is a recent breed developed from the Manx.)." Iterresise (talk) 22:00, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@Iterresise The reason I use "See above" and "See below" is that it's the best way to let reader to jump into the character's section without scrolling up and down looking for them. It's a character page, and the nature of it is that one character can appear in multiple sections. Do you have any other advice of how to fix it besides using "See above" and "See below"? Because I read what's wrote in the link provided and they also suggest to use "See above" and "See below". -Theodorethebear (talk) 00:06, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, there's no better way to rewrite our duplicate the whole section. I think the best way is to link it like I did, using "See above" and "See below". If you don't have any better suggestion, I'll change it back after a while. Theodorethebear (talk) 00:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean {{crossreference}}? The documentation links to those templates. But don't you think you can rewrite the description so the reader doesn't have to look elsewhere? Take a look at some of the featured lists.

Why not shorten the biographies and write only about the role of the characters as a student in the student section?

With regard to the template: User_talk:SMcCandlish#template:crossref: "The first two of those templates are basically obsolete and should just be replaced with simple wrappers for {{crossreference}}. They were unnecessarily complex.". Iterresise (talk) 00:41, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

> Why not shorten the biographies and write only about the role of the characters as a student in the student section?

Oh about this part. I feel it is very redundant to write like that. For example: when you want to search for the character Anya Forger, what you want is her (brief but sufficient) information in one place, not her family information in one section and her student information in one section. Writing like that will make the reader missed out on pivotal information if her second section is way way down below or stuck in one section that someone forgot to check. It is the nature of a fiction's character page.

Like I explain, "See above" and "See below" are the best option to categorize character into categories and, at the same time, put every necessary information in one place and enable readers to reach them in the easiest way. It may be complex and redundant in other pages (like your example of cat species?) but it is necessary here in this page.

-Theodorethebear (talk) 02:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Iterresise Also as I stated my reason above, I would like to switch the page back to the previous state. Your reasoning of it is complex and redundant is too general and it is not applied in this case/page. If you have a way to rewrite it (without breaking the information in 2/3 separate places and making them significantly harder for readers to look up information), please go ahead. I honestly don't know how to do that. -Theodorethebear (talk) 02:35, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

This is a manga and a series. Are new books being published? Won't this page get longer? I have to disagree that telling people to go somewhere to get the required information is best.

I'm confused by what you mean "fiction's character page". What I know is: with this page: characters are divided into sections. If a character has a plot in a family and then another at a school, it is most logical to discuss the plots separately. Iterresise (talk) 04:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Iterresise Sorry for my bad writing. I will repeat what I said above here: I mean your reasoning to delete those "See above" and "See below" is not sufficient. And separating the plot into two for one character will makes readers have a hard time to look up for information. So I disagree with your reasoning. If you like to separate them and can write a better work without confuse readers, then go ahead. I honestly cannot do that, because it is, for me, confusing and redundant. And I will not waste time to make it worse like you suggested. Until such time, I would like to reverse it to the original state because it is better for the readers to look up information within the page; it does not violate any wikipedia rules, if I am not wrong -Theodorethebear (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Iterresise Just fixed it as I still wanted the cross references and also provided some info for the characters within the secondary category they are in. Hoppe it is to your liking. -Theodorethebear (talk) 04:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

It definitely looks better. That's what I am talking about: splitting descriptions into different sections. However: I still find it confusing that you would tell someone to look elsewhere. Iterresise (talk) 08:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You can reorganize your page alphabetically. It is often better rewritten. Iterresise (talk) 08:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

To clarify me being quoted out of context above as if I support removing these templates (which I do not): I meant that the code in the templates {{see above}} and {{see below}} is unnecessarily complex, and should be replaced with wrapper code for {{crossreference}}. This is a template code maintenance (and eventually documentation) concern only, and has no bearing whatsoever on the templates' in-article use, which would be exactly the same from the reader's perspective after the template code is simplified.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Forger family article

Thought about drafting a character article for the entire Forger family since the series is gaining in popularity, notability, and relevance. Would anyone be adverse to this? MushroomMan674 (talk) 22:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I think the three family members could have the their own article on their own considering the reception they got here in the list especially with Anya winning awards and used as marketing. See Frieren (character) as an example of a recent character that got article devoted towards her rather than the series. Tintor2 (talk) 22:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)