Difference between revisions of "Talk:Golden Acorn Awards"
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
3. Should the maintainers of a web page be mentioned when the page itself receives the award (like Best Website Content)? | 3. Should the maintainers of a web page be mentioned when the page itself receives the award (like Best Website Content)? | ||
| − | I'm not sure. Basically, I was bored that night, had just remembered my RangerWiki login (I'd forgotten my password) and noticed that no one had done anything for the 2007 GAAs yet. So I worked on them until I literally fell asleep at my desk. (Which might also explain unstandardized layouts...) | + | I'm not sure. Basically, I was bored that night, had just remembered my RangerWiki login (I'd forgotten my password) and noticed that no one had done anything for the 2007 GAAs yet. So I worked on them until I literally fell asleep at my desk. (Which might also explain unstandardized layouts...) -Eddie |
Revision as of 22:09, 5 March 2008
I have a question concerning the GAA pages' layout (more precisely it's standardization):
1. Should the "Other nominees" section be done as a list (like in the 2007 awards' page)? I believe it is more clear that way.
2. Should the links redirect to individual works, author's page on the Wiki, a section of it or somewhere entirely different?
3. Should the maintainers of a web page be mentioned when the page itself receives the award (like Best Website Content)?
I'm not sure. Basically, I was bored that night, had just remembered my RangerWiki login (I'd forgotten my password) and noticed that no one had done anything for the 2007 GAAs yet. So I worked on them until I literally fell asleep at my desk. (Which might also explain unstandardized layouts...) -Eddie
