| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of mycologists article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Anybody mind ...
edit... if I rearrange the names so that they appear last, first? If there are no complaints, I'll do so in about a week. Sasata (talk) 04:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, no opposition to the above. Before I do so, any ideas on how to make the formatting of the article more useful? I'm thinking of a table with sortable columns for name, birth year, and author abbreviation. Other suggestions? Sasata (talk) 21:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- I've done the deed. There's currently a heavy bias towards North Americans, but hopefully that will improve as others work on the page. Sasata (talk) 15:55, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
This looks quite good. Do you want to add a note at the top about lichenologists? Many mycologists studied both (C. W. Dodge and Nylader are excellent examples.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbTricoter (talk • contribs) 19:48, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
- Good idea, have mentioned this in the intro. Sasata (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Images
editHi. In my browser the string of images at the top of the article stack singly and vertically which now means a long scroll down to the list itself, making the article initially appear to be a list of images of Mycologists. I boldly converted these to a gallery, thus, at least, compacting the layout.
This change was reverted. The related comment cites WP:IG, presumably, and not unreasonably, on the basis that the gallery failed the rule of thumb; such a gallery would only lend itself to a title along the lines of "Gallery" or "Images of [insert article title]". However WP:IG itself cites wikipedia is not an image repository and says that "Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text", which they are not in this case.
One alternative might be to include images in the table where these are available. I think this only works well where the majority of list entries actually have an accompanying image (e.g. Grade I listed buildings in the City of London). Another alternative, as suggested by WP:IG itself, is to use the Commons to group the images and simply include a {{Commons}} pointer to that. What do others think? --KenBailey (talk) 07:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)