Talk:Passions

Organization
Added cleanup: TV quotes should be organized by season/episode, not by character. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 05:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Passions is a soap opera. It doesn't really have seasons, at least by conventional primetime standards.  And as for episodes, there have been over 1,600 - surely looking through so many episodes for quotes would be more of a hassle than looking through characters. Charity McKay 15:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Surely, verifying quotations by going through that many episodes would be even harder. I found, in a similar situation with webcomic strips (often having in the hundreds if not thousands strips), organizing decimally is nice (so you could have a header going 1-10, 11-20 etc., and then each quote can have an episode number). The advantage to organizing by character is that this solves the dialogue problem neatly, as well as the verifiability. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 16:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The ability to source and verify quotes is one of the things that separates Wikiquote from all other quote databases, so it's important that we have some means to identify when a quote was said. Regardless of which way the quotes are organized, the format should provide a means to identify this. If strict-character orientation is favored, this can be done as with theme and people articles, with a 2nd-level bullet. As far as seasons go, IMDb treats everything as being in "season 1", but TV.com has episodes divided by seasons of about 250-260 episodes each. (I'm not sure I trust TV.com episode info, though; I've found season number errors for several programs there.) Neither suggests that the usual TV-episode stucture would be especially useful. (MST3K has about 320 section headings, which is uncomfortably huge; soap operas would have 1-2 orders of magnitude more, and might not have a reasonable means to provide a custom TOC.) I'd suggest that sourcing should focus on episode numbers and original air dates, but I leave it to soap fans to figure out how they think headings should be handled. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 08:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)