Hey! So this summer, I'd like to re-read all of the TP books and hope to add information currently missing from the Wiki along the way. So I was just wondering where you'd personally draw the line for who or what warrants an article here and whatnot. For example, there are a good number of people in the books (especially the Access Guide) who we hear about once and never again.
Such as, in the Secret Diary, Laura says of her pony, "I decided his name should be Troy, like the pony in Mrs. Larkin's photo book."
There isn't ever a mention of this Mrs. Larkin ever again, making her one of the least notable people in the whole franchise. As much as I'd like to have an article for every person even mentioned, I'm just afraid of completely overdoing it, haha.
My feeling is that everything in the way of people or locations deserves its own article, even the most minor. Obviously the more notable ones should be prioritized - there are a lot of main character articles that still need serious work and especially more images, IMO - but in the long term I don't see the harm in being as complete as possible. Not as though we're using a finite amount of data after all!
I would hesitate to do the same for every possible object or abstract concept, though - that gets you articles about breasts and limbs lol. Still I think specific or named objects that are reasonably prominent should qualify, on a case-by-case basis. Actually, I think Twin Peaks is perfect for this kind of thing - in the process of writing even minor articles you highlight connections a lot of people aren't aware of.
I'm giving this because edits to .page-header__title are considered violations. Please change the selector of .page-header__title to the ones given. Do this on 24 Wiki too. It is live on this wiki. Remember, this can change all h1s so you should use this. Thanks!!! MarTsok 10:11, September 15, 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I see that my contribution was really short lived. Pity! I hoped to interest some fan of Twin Peaks into a tribute (that actually sold quite well in Europe)... Whatever! I have no hard feelings. Is there any way I can temporarily recover the page, so that I can at least save it on my computer? ---Abacos (talk) 09:30, September 9, 2017 (UTC)
Hi! Sorry, I'm actually not familiar with the comic but we only cover officially licensed Twin Peaks releases at the moment. Seems like it would be a good addition to Twin Peaks in popular culture, though. I'll put it back up in your userspace!
Here it is. Hadn't heard of it before but it looks awesome, and you did a good write-up. Definitely think you should add it to the pop culture page, maybe cut it down a bit to focus on the Twin Peaks-related aspects?
I definitely think certain entries on that page that are straight-up homages instead of minor references are worth expanding into their own pages - Deadly Premonition for one - so depending on how others feel it might warrant an article!
Thank you, I appreciate your kindness. I was afraid of a reaction like: "What is this foreign plagairism?" ^_^ I will add a section to the pop culture page titled "European graphic novels" (because they are very different from American "men-in-leotards comics", a.k.a. superheroes) tomorrow. ---Abacos (talk) 17:06, September 9, 2017 (UTC)
Hey, do you think we should combine the Mitchum Bros articles into one? The articles are damn near identical and they haven't really been shown at all as being unique characters on their own. And I kinda doubt that'll change in the final two hours.
I think in 10 and 11 there's enough parts where they diverge, generally I'm against combining articles unless they would be word for word exactly the same. I'd wait and see what happens next week because anything is possible
Hi, I wondered what font you used for the new design.
If it can help, it seems that the consensus among fans are:
Titles for TP:FWWM are ITC Franklin Gothic Demi Compressed Italic in all caps, scaled to 120% of the standard X-height for the typeface.
Titles for Twin Peaks (1990) are ITC Avant Garde Gothic Demi Condensed.
Apparently they use a different font for the Black Lodge (they change these ones nearly every time between ep2, 29 FWWM, TMP and the revival), The Missing Pieces titles and the new series titles and credits seem to be slightly different also.
I am not that good with font identification, but if you are maybe you could try to put them at different places of the wiki (just a suggestion of course)
Also, the font of the Twin Peaks Gazette/Post (the real world publication, episode 24 prop and TSHOTP) is Rustic (though TSHOTP used Logger instead for the oldest cover which had Andrew Packard article)
But it seems less likely to be usable on the wiki
Flesh world cover could also be interesting but that does not seem very usable and is not yet identified as far as I know
Hello again, I noticed on the 24 wiki that the famous number font was used in a few places.
If you want to use a Twin Peaks related font for numbers, I think the one used on the pole "6" and the electrical outlets "3" and "15" of Part 3 could be an interesting choice. The corresponding font is named Bayside.
Really. Publications all over the world are using this site as reference and using the wrong name for the bar. It has never been referred to in the show as the Bang Bang Bar. Not even once. Never in the scripts, never in the books, never. So why are you so insistent on keeping this reference? The Neon Sign says "The Bar" and has a gun on it. It does not say "The Bang Bang Bar"
Never in 25 years have I heard this term used until it was used here. I don't know why you think that you know better than the show, the books, the movies, the authors... I just don't get why you would knowingly create a new name for something that has had the same name since the original show aired.
The evidence for the bar being called the roadhouse:
1. Multiple characters saying this name in seasons 1 and 2. And by Multiple I mean all of them. "There are owls in the Roadhouse"