Board Thread:Administrative/@comment-16461120-20170310003740/@comment-61022-20170312214148

Mrkermit wrote: And from the other guy who's been reading comics for over 30 years, drop that attitude and unneeded sarcasm that I saw in your previous post. Those kind of remarks don't help our discussion.

My issue is that instead of giving more weight to the opinions to the people who have the breadth of knowledge to comment on these issues is often overlooked based on the general perception.

If you go through the posts of people commenting their major concern is how FlashOnly tags being logged into Minor Appearances might sort things incorrectly.

Everyone is ignoring that I've said that these concerns are minor -- at best -- and explain why. There are no dissenting opinions on my assessment on the situation other than concerns with no basis of fact.

Mrkermit wrote: If you have read my previous postings you know that we have roughly the same opinion about listing and categorizing appearances. However, your examples about how the things should have been done were not possible before the introduction of minor appearances.

I understand that I am stating this easier method after the implementation of the Minor Appearances.

What I'm pointing out is that the current implementation -- keeping "FlashOnly" as a major appearance has created more work for everyone. Because as I've said above, a great majority of these flashbacks, as they have been transcribed, are actually what we're trying to identify as recaps.

We're talking about thousands of pages that haven't been updated in over a decade.

These are things I have observed from going through and adding comic summaries to all of these pages.

Mrkermit wrote: would have resulted the same as. Actually it would still result the same because we have a different Template:OnScreenOnly for minor appearances. It would help a lot if somebody could arrange templates to Category:Minor Appearance Templates and to Category:Major Appearance Templates. That's also work that our site needs, not just article edits.

To clarify, the examples above, are for an OnScreen appearance that has a chronological appearance over ones that don't. Frankly, I think that if people are adding a chronological appearance tag they should be adding the APN and figuring out where these characters appear.

This can all be found on the Chronology Project, they've covered everything up to Secret Wars for most characters, so really the only "challenge" is figuring out chronologies from August 2016 to present. That's not exactly a difficult endeavor.