| abstract
| - I haven't been able to find anything in any of our guides that states whether Episode synopsises (synopses? synopsai? I've never actually encountered the plural form of that word...) should be written in past tense or present tense. Is there a consensus on that? -Beardog4314 17:38, 7 November 2006 (PST)
* Past tense would be my vote. Robert K S 18:06, 7 November 2006 (PST)
* Past tense - They've always been past tense in Lostpedia AFAIK. More broadly, I believe plot summaries always are in the past tense. -- 02:35, 15 December 2006 (PST) I think it would flow better too, but at the moment every single Episode summary is written in present tense. - 10:20, 15 December 2006 (PST) Past tense makes even more sense when you consider that all the events of Lost took place in 2004 or prior. Robert K S 11:42, 15 December 2006 (PST) Totally. I'm not saying they should be in present tense, I'm just saying they currently are, so I took that as an informal consensus. At least for the time being they're consistent. - 12:05, 15 December 2006 (PST)
* Added a first draft of tense into the main article. It definitely needs serious tweaking, but I wanted to get the episode synopsis=past tense in there. -- 04:05, 17 December 2006 (PST)
* Past tense as whatever we chronical happened in the past, be it in 2004 in the story line, or the fact that it has been broadcast, synopsis and character history should always be in past tense -- 06:07, 5 January 2007 (PST)
* Comment. Not to say this changes my vote, but I noticed recently that Wikipedia has adopted the policy of all descriptions of fictional events being written in present tense to distinguish them from actual historical happenings. Robert K S 09:47, 5 January 2007 (PST)
* Interesting. I don't have an opinion on this topic, but could you pass along a link to this Wikipedia decision? Maybe they've had a useful debate.--Dagg 09:52, 5 January 2007 (PST)
* I can't find the debate, but check out these sections: Guide to writing better articles, Editorial guidelines. (Also they have special templates that you can tag articles describing fiction with if they do not hold to the present-tense-only standard.) Note that the policy trends toward softening of this guideline, with the distinction being made between writing "out-of-universe" (i.e., from the perspective of the real world) and "in-universe". Cf. the current MoS for writing about fiction, which does not tolerate in-universe writing, and the draft for a revision, which tolerates its use sparingly. IMHO this is the rare area where there is little reason for Lostpedia to adopt a Wikipedia standard, since Lostpedia is all about a fictional universe and there is no special reason to distinguish in-universe writing by holding it to the present tense. Robert K S 10:15, 5 January 2007 (PST)
* Thanks, that was an interesting read. It looks like Wikipedia says that Lostpedia uses the in-universe perspective, so I guess the debate is settled. Just kidding :).--Dagg 10:41, 5 January 2007 (PST)
* I didn't see that, thanks for posting. "Lostpedia--in-universe and proud of it!" Robert K S 13:37, 5 January 2007 (PST)
* Past tense: -- 18:48, 17 January 2007 (PST)
* Present tense:I feel the synopsis should read like a walkthrough guiding you through the episode it is SO much easier for them to do this in present tense.--THE MONSTER
* Very interesting find from Robert KS. Anyways, good point that Lostpedia is about the fictional universe. Note that our editors never seem to have a problem putting fictional events from The Lost Experience into the past tense-- the only issue is with episodes. Also note that we do have some factual information, e.g. on the cast, crew, producers, companies, publishers-- and that this information includes events, but only in very rare cases can these be confused with fictional events (e.g., when corporation executives from real companies being named in TLE). Therefore I'm still leaning to past tense. -- 12:45, 19 January 2007 (PST)
* Past tense Personally, I think it flows better. And something that happened in "Homecoming" (a random example) should be written in past tense instead of present tense. It happenED, it airED, and is now not currently happening. My two cents. David 12:38, 19 January 2007 (PST)
* Past Tense Why? Because it happened in the past. Just my opinion though, I'm fine either way even though I'd prefer past tense. -- 12:53, 19 January 2007 (PST) Consensus: Synopses on Lostpedia should be written in past tense. The MoS was previously updated with this information.--Dagg 16:12, 22 January 2007 (PST)
* Comment: Consensus may not have been reached. See subsection "Dispute" below, as well as #Metadiscussion: tense immediately below that. -- 11:16, 27 January 2007 (PST)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)