blindVigil said:
Is that really that important? You could just note the first page of each chapter in the pool description, if it were really that important.
... Yes, chapter separation is relevant, I hope this doesn't come as a surprise?
Posted under General
ANON_TOKYO said:
... Yes, chapter separation is relevant, I hope this doesn't come as a surprise?
It is important, but not as much as making sure the reader doesn't have to jump through unnecessary hoops to read them all. You don't even have links to other chapters in these pools. It would have to occur to the reader to look at the copytag to see the chapter list, which is not intuitive.
But even if you do add links to these currently scattered pools, combining them in one pool and adding a table of contents is still preferable. What will you do if this series ends up getting 30 chapters? What about 100? Are you going to give each of those 100 chapters their own pools? What if everyone uploading a work with multiple chapters did this? It would be a mess.
If the table of contents is not enough and you want to make sure the reader knows the instant a new chapter starts, you could just add a comment.
Blank_User said:
It is important, but not as much as making sure the reader doesn't have to jump through unnecessary hoops to read them all. You don't even have links to other chapters in these pools. It would have to occur to the reader to look at the copytag to see the chapter list, which is not intuitive.
You could make that argument for any place where the other chapters are put.
But even if you do add links to these currently scattered pools, combining them in one pool and adding a table of contents is still preferable. What will you do if this series ends up getting 30 chapters? What about 100? Are you going to give each of those 100 chapters their own pools? What if everyone uploading a work with multiple chapters did this? It would be a mess.
If you think the naming scheme of <Copyright> - Chapter <n> (<artist>) leads to "scattered pools" I don't know how to help you. And whether this is a good approach if it gets 100 chapters is not something to decide when it has <10.
If the table of contents is not enough and you want to make sure the reader knows the instant a new chapter starts, you could just add a comment.
"It would have to occur to the reader to look at the comments to see where the chapter starts."
ANON_TOKYO said:
You could make that argument for any place where the other chapters are put.
Including the pool description? That's the place I'd expect most users to look if they wanted to know exactly how the chapters are divided. Who's going to think to check the copytag?
If you think the naming scheme of
<Copyright> - Chapter <n> (<artist>)leads to "scattered pools" I don't know how to help you. And whether this is a good approach if it gets 100 chapters is not something to decide when it has <10.
Why should users be expected to do a search for that? Even if there was a good reason to keep the pools separate, they should still have links to other chapters so it's easier to navigate from one pool to another.
"It would have to occur to the reader to look at the comments to see where the chapter starts."
Even before the comments, the reader is likely to see the commentary stating how far into the chapter they are. It's directly before the post and can't be hidden, so it's pretty hard to miss. The only thing that might trip people up is that they don't contain the chapter number (I know you didn't upload the first image of each chapter because they appear again in the chapter proper), but convenient navigation is much more important imo.
I recently added a table of contents to pool #20780, which also has similar commentary. There are now 14 chapters, some with multiple parts, in that pool. Now users can easily jump to the start of a chapter if they want to. There is no need to navigate to a completely different pool to continue the story; one can just read from beginning to end without any interruptions. And the commentary helps them navigate through each chapter if they need that extra information. I think the Girls x Vampire pool should follow suit.
ANON_TOKYO said:
You could make that argument for any place where the other chapters are put.
If you think the naming scheme of
<Copyright> - Chapter <n> (<artist>)leads to "scattered pools" I don't know how to help you. And whether this is a good approach if it gets 100 chapters is not something to decide when it has <10."It would have to occur to the reader to look at the comments to see where the chapter starts."
Not the same argument. Comments are right below the image. You could make the argument that a reader isn't guaranteed to scroll down that far, but at least they wouldn't need to completely navigate away from comic to find the chapter information. The artist commentary also denotes the current chapter, and even if they aren't translated and you couldn't read Japanese, it's not that hard to work out what the numbers in the commentary mean.
Ultimately, you've just made reading this series as inconvenient as possible. Instead of just being able to press d until they reach the end of the story, they have to stop and periodically navigate to wherever you've hidden the links to the other pools to continue reading. And to even know how many chapters there are, they have to check the copyright, the last place I would think to check because I can't think of a single other series where we included that information in the copytag wiki, rather than the pool description.
blindVigil said:
The artist commentary also denotes the current chapter, and even if they aren't translated and you couldn't read Japanese, it's not that hard to work out what the numbers in the commentary mean.
It should be noted that the commentaries at the beginning of each chapter were not originally from the uploaded posts. They are taken from the first tweet for each chapter, which was not uploaded for the reasons I explained above.
Beyond the first post in each chapter, the commentaries denote the tweet that contains the image. For example, (2/4) means the second out of four tweets. It does not actually say which chapter it is. That information is only provided in the first tweet of each chapter.
Edit: Thank you @aster1a for adding some links to each pool. However, I still think we need to merge the pools eventually.
Updated by Blank User
Blank_User said:
pool #24781
pool #24888
pool #25633
pool #25634
pool #25635Each pool contains a single chapter of Girls x Vampire (chapters 2 through 6). Shouldn't these all be put in pool #24654, which currently only contains the first chapter?
Edit: Adding pool #25637 and pool #25638 for chapters 7 and 8, respectively.
Yes please, keep continuous series in a single pool. It's just a better user experience. There's no point in scattering chapter apart like this.
I don't see a problem putting them together, but the index should be better than what is done in pool #20780. If I didn't explicitly open that in the context of finding the starts of chapters, I'd have no idea what the number links mean, and even then I had to click and look to figure out what the 2 and 3 meant.
Edit: looks like user #1333332 (interesting ID) beat me to it. The current formatting is what I would expect from a ToC, so this is perfectly fine.
ANON_TOKYO said:
I don't see a problem putting them together,
Then what was the point of that whole back-and-forth?
but the index should be better than what is done in pool #20780. If I didn't explicitly open that in the context of finding the starts of chapters, I'd have no idea what the number links mean, and even then I had to click and look to figure out what the
2and3meant.Edit: looks like user #1333332 (interesting ID) beat me to it. The current formatting is what I would expect from a ToC, so this is perfectly fine.
I was trying to keep the format consistent and I assumed most people would've been able to figure it out. I changed it just now so the links for single-part chapters are the titles and the different parts of the other chapters are clearly labeled as such.
Blank_User said:
Then what was the point of that whole back-and-forth?
A bunch of flimsy arguments beyond "It's impractical" and a lack of better alternatives being offered that aren't also flawed just in different ways.
I was trying to keep the format consistent and I assumed most people would've been able to figure it out. I changed it just now so the links for single-part chapters are the titles and the different parts of the other chapters are clearly labeled as such.
After mentioning it in the discord I've updated pool #24654 to simply list the pages, though I think the previous solution of listing the chapter lengths was goodas well. There may be an even better one, but this might one at least works well It's just not clear that the links in pool #20780 lead to the chapters until you click on them, which kind of defeats the point of having them as a ToC.
ANON_TOKYO said:
A bunch of flimsy arguments beyond "It's impractical" and a lack of better alternatives being offered that aren't also flawed just in different ways.
You're only backpedalling on this now because an admin spoke up. We'd have been here all week, otherwise.
An admin that said the exact same thing we said, even. Wasn't so "flimsy" of an argument then, huh?
ANON_TOKYO said:
It's just not clear that the links in pool #20780 lead to the chapters until you click on them, which kind of defeats the point of having them as a ToC.
Where else would those links lead to? There's pretty much only one reason why hyperlinks would be included in a table of contents. I'm pretty sure it's a common practice for e-books and online documents.
Having chapter lengths could be useful so the reader gets an idea of how much time they need to spend reading it, but I wouldn't consider it absolutely essential. I would've worked it in if I could, but the only way I could think of would be to put each chapter part on its own line, and I think it would be better to keep the list as short as possible. Two parts per chapter is pretty much the standard for that story now and that's going to add up real quick.
LQ said:
The chapter pools could be in addition to the complete series pool so that each post is in two pools. But the status quo is fine too, as there aren't many cases where being unable to distinguish where a new chapter begins actually matters.
Having posts be in multiple series pools looks bad imo. It's also like having posts in a pool also be parented when they're already in the intended viewing order. There's no real reason to have extraneous pools like that.
Blank_User said:
Where else would those links lead to? There's pretty much only one reason why hyperlinks would be included in a table of contents. I'm pretty sure it's a common practice for e-books and online documents.
The lack of clarity I see is specifically in the text of the links. A random 1 could lead anywhere, I don't think it's particularly clear that it links to "page 1 of this chapter".
Having the title as a link doesn't have that issue but, and this is maybe more of a me-issue than a general one, I would almost expect those to lead off-site. Just having a link that points somewhere might go anywhere, but a link pointing to Page 1 sets the expecation that you to, well, a post.
Having chapter lengths could be useful so the reader gets an idea of how much time they need to spend reading it, but I wouldn't consider it absolutely essential. I would've worked it in if I could, but the only way I could think of would be to put each chapter part on its own line, and I think it would be better to keep the list as short as possible. Two parts per chapter is pretty much the standard for that story now and that's going to add up real quick.
Yeah I also think that'd be useful but not exactly vital. In the case of pool #24654 it was brought up, but we figured that just having the actual page numbers means you are still able to get the rough length of a chapter at a glance, so it's not really a big deal. Even without that, it's probably not worth spending too much brainpower on.
edit: It's gone now. Thanks.
Would someone please delete this pool for me? I created it in error.
pool #25679
Updated by CrossbowArcanePlus
Is pool #1759 really necessary? I know it predates slice of life being made into a tag, but nowdays it feels like pokemon slice_of_life or pokemon_(creature) slice_of_life would suffice fine without the strange segregation.
It's also rather annoying that to see Pokémon-focused slice of life posts you can't just go to the slice of life tag, you have to specifically seek out the pool.
Especially when you get posts like post #7629087 where the characters are equivalent to anything else under furry slice_of_life...
BUR #41288 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
mass update pool:1759 -> slice_of_life
Let's put it to a vote.
The bulk update request #41039 (forum #354424) has been approved by @nonamethanks.