Talk:Minor characters of True Blood

What is with this formatting???? Can the original author post here the logic for spacing everything out so much. The list should be tight and concise as the subject matter is not all that signifigant. Not posting anything soon will result in a massive reformatting of the article. Musing Sojourner (talk) 15:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Not posting anything soon will result in a massive reformatting of the article.", really? Because most of the time we go by consensus, not one person's irritations. This is formatted the same way as the main characters and the space is left so that the entries can be filled with the relevant information. Not enough space is worse than too much space. Feel free to add more information. Darrenhusted (talk) 18:00, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

You can create space later on. Given that True Blood could run for a while there's no telling how many characters and how much information about those characters needs to be included. Better to tighten up the formatting now and just readjust it each time information that forces a readjustment is added is added. Doing it like this means the article won't ever look crisp until the conclusion of the True Blood series, which means at a point that few people will actually be trying to go read it. Musing Sojourner (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "You can create space later on", this is not a paper encyclopaedia, and space is not an issue. There is no deadline that imposes on the format, it's getting 500 views a day on average at the moment, and no TV pages ever look "crisp". Look at the X-Files pages, or the original Melrose Place, they are terrible. Even pages that become FA end up being edited to be worse. If you have a suggestion of how it should be formatted then put it in a sandbox for others to look at. Darrenhusted (talk) 18:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Still that's a lot of white space to have for no reason, as space is not an issue, which was my main point. There are many minor character pages for TV series and book series that have tighter formatting than this. The Wheel of Time Minor Characters page does, as does the South Park one to name a few I've checked out recently. Saying that other TV shows minor character pages have bad formatting is not really the point, as we aren't looking at those pages, but at this one. We may as well tighten it up and make it look well done, because if we wait until AFTER the series is over the views will go way down and there won't be much point to doing it. If the spacing were adjusted the page would look pretty solid, as the rest of the formatting appears to be neat and uniform. Musing Sojourner (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Spacing can't be adjusted. The space can be filled, but not reduced. Darrenhusted (talk) 16:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Vampire Queen
should we move the Vampire Queen into a major character seeing as she will be in Season 3? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josemrdj (talk • contribs) 01:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Generally, you don't alter an article based on something that's projected to happen because it's considered speculative until it actually occurs. -Hooliganb (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Well she is in Season 3. But I don't think she's exactly a major character even though she has a big role for now I think in the future she is either going to be killed or just fade out. I can't see her as a reoccurring character really. But that is just my speculation I don't think she should be added to major characters unless she assumes a much more important and long standing role later in the series. Travis (talk) 18:33, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Something should be done, since she appears twice, one in the Minor characters and once in the main list of characters. The minor characters section has more information but the other paragraph has an image.--93.104.58.168 (talk) 14:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Notability
I have restored the Notability tag which was removed in September shortly after it was added. There are still no tertiary sources for this article, so it currently doesn't seem to meet the wikipedia notability criteria. This info is more suited for a wikia, in my opinion. I mean no offense to the editors who have put a lot of work into this. Tkech (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2010 (UTC)