Template talk:SharpeSeries

The phrase "in historical order" doesn't make any sense to me. Given that "in chronological order" would also be ambiguous, would anyone object to the phrase "in story order"? Binabik80 00:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Having heard no pushback, I'm going to make the change. Binabik80 16:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Being an historical novel sequence the "natural" term should not be ambiguous at all. :: Kevinalewis  :  (Talk Page) / (Desk)  15:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Is this template still needed?
Template:SharpeSeries2 covers the same information but in a different format and is actually used across the series, whereas this one is only used in 1 article. Broken Sphere Msg me 16:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I thought it would be still needed as the article on which it sits presents it's information differently - but I don't have strong view on it. As you might appreciate from the naming this was the original template SharpeSeries2 was it's replacement on the novel articles as this one got in the way of "infoboxes". If you decide to got for the other form then renaming might be in order. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  15:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

That's the thing, an infobox could go in its place but I would go for a standard fictional character one if possible first vs. creating a Sharpe series specific one, as there are other Cornwell characters that have articles up that don't belong to the Sharpe series, e.g. Nathaniel Starbuck. I was thinking about nominating this for TFD, but am also wondering if merging or redirecting might be better. Broken Sphere Msg me 15:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed merge and redirect would be the way to go. A Infobox character use for these articles would be a good idea as well. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  15:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Redirected, as the info is otherwise duplicative.  Broken Sphere Msg me 16:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)