Template talk:Plutarch
The other tableI have fixed several errors in this table regarding mistaken identifications. (I caught Brutus, Dion, and Aratus.) However, the other table (such as appears on the Parallel Lives page) is still in error, and I don't know how to fix it or comment upon it. Once it is correct, it also needs to be removed from the erroneous biographies and added to the correct ones. 132.161.166.27 03:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Color SchemeI've reverted the colors. They're bright. Not dull. If it's really inappropriate then they could be removed again at a later time, but I'd like to give them a run at least. -BiancaOfHell 15:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC) The Parallel Lives and the Solo LivesThere might be a better way of clarifying which of the Lives are the parallel ones and which are the solo biographies, without complicating the template: Aratus of Sicyon, Artaxerxes, Galba, Otho. Maybe even which pairs of Lives have comparisons that are still extant. And which ones start with the Roman lives first(Aemilius Paulus-Timoleon, Coriolanus-Alcibiades and Sertorius-Eumenes.), instead of Plutarch's general trend of starting with Greek lives. Probably conveying this information is beyond a template's use. -BiancaOfHell 18:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Improvementscould rename 'The Translators' to 'Editors and Translators' since John Dryden and possibly Clough were nothing more than editors. Maybe 'Editors, translators and biographers? Include Rualdus then ... Maybe two sections... Translators... and Editors/Biographers? Anyways, there's room for improvement.-BiancaOfHell 13:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
What do the template footnotes "Comparison extant" and "Four unpaired Lives" mean?The Plutarch template contains footnotes saying "Comparison extant" and "Four unpaired Lives". What do these notes mean? I saw the Plutarch template used at the article Arthur Hugh Clough and visited the template history page to identify who authored the footnotes so I could address my question to him, only to discover that the individual, User:BillDeanCarter, is banned and cannot be contacted. The footnotes have survived unmolested or even questioned, it seems, since written by BillDeanCarter on 13 December 2006, so perhaps they are meaningful or useful, but it would be helpful to the general reader if the footnotes were explained somewhere that he could be directed to in an obvious way such as (See template talk page) or maybe they could be restyled to be less obscure in themselves. As Wikipedia is meant to explain things—and reveal—baffling obscurities are best avoided. — O'Dea 08:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC) |