Talk:Quick conversation questions

I'm not so sure about the "See also" elements. It will make cutting and pasting difficult.

How about using internal links instead for instance:


 *  Jobs and employment: job interviews; starting a new job; asking for a salary increase;
 *  Language skills: learning foreign languages; speaking in public;  speaking in English in public; writing poetry; writing a novel;
 * Red tape: dealing with bureaucracy; visas; passports;
 *  Traffic: learning to drive; buying a new car; driving; having a car accident; road safety; traffic control; cycle lanes; public transport;

OR using headings like this

Jobs and employment

 * job interviews; starting a new job; asking for a salary increase;

Language skills
learning foreign languages; speaking in public; speaking in English in public; writing poetry; writing a novel;

Red tape

 * dealing with bureaucracy; visas; passports;

Traffic
learning to drive; buying a new car; driving; having a car accident; road safety; traffic control; cycle lanes; public transport;

New section to avoid possible format conflict
Version 2 above is much the best, but I don't agree that the link should be incorporated into the subsection heading because there is often more than one possible conversation question page to each subsection. Wikipedia also recommends against doing so, arguing that any link should be in the body of the text or as a list item.


 * So how 'bout:

Jobs and employment
See also Employment conversation questions
 * job interviews; starting a new job; asking for a salary increase;

Ball's in your court... --Technopat 09:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem with that one is that you've still got the "see also" in the middle of the text. If people are just going to cut and past then they are going to need to edit it out.  I suppose that they may need to do some editing anyway, but obliging them to edit out an extra line under each section doesn't seem very user-friendly.


 * As far as the Wikipedia policies are concerned: firstly, although I am sure that their policies are very good, they don't necessarily have to be followed by every wiki which may have different aims and objectives from those of an on-line encyclopaedia - though I, of course, accept that WP guidelines give a good indication. Secondly, this is not really an "article" in the WP sense of the term, (WP articles are meant to inform while this is meant to be copy pasted), so I'm not sure that the WP guidelines would be relevant in this case even if we had decided to follow them automatically.


 * OK, so the "see also" gag goes at the end of each subsection rather than beneath the header. No sweat. Anyone copy-and-pasting just stops short of the following subsection and copies away to his or her delight. But as I mentioned above, some of the topics relate to more than one conversation questions page, so I reckon we need that "see also" - which is so useful on all the other Teflpedia pages...


 * As for wiki policies, Wikipedia has the advantage of sheer volume of editors reaching consensus - sometimes - on formatting, and as you point out, is in general a pretty good indication. Of course that doesn't mean that Teflpedia has to follow it blindly. --Technopat 15:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yesss... the thing I was imagining that teachers would grab the whole page - not just the subsection which interested them.  However, there would not seem to be an ideal solution so I guess that's the way to go.  :-) --Bob M 12:12, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Update

 * As of 16 October 2011, the article page had 19 sections with links to 38 conversation pages. If/when you add of your plenty, please remember to update this figure in the introduction section. Cheers! --Technopat 17:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * As of 1 November 2011: 19 sections & links to 45 conversation pages. --Technopat 23:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * As of 8 November 2011: 19 sections & links to 46 conversation pages. --Technopat 10:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)