Board Thread:The Panopticon/@comment-1678571-20191229152222/@comment-5918438-20191230191339

In any case, my position, which seems also to be the thinking behind the removal of content you've noted, is that extensive details regarding an item or topic ought to be given on the page for the thing itself, which the note in references serves to link to (as well as to, briefly, link that thing back into the story in question). And in the same vein, a reference point should not be giving extensive detail about major actions taking place in the story, as that is the domain of the plot section, really.

But I also oppose letting go of full sentences in reference sections. I see little value in having a simple list on story pages, merely telling readers "hamburgers, 1208, Gorgonzola, U-boat, beam synthesiser".

What I see as the great merit of having a references section is getting to cover (and place in context, in the briefest of terms) those stray little nuggets of information, like an historical event the Doctor name-drops having participated in, or, say, a local alien delicacy, an interesting book which a character is seen reading, a piece of technology with little relevance to the overall story. We wouldn't want to bog down the Plot section of The Day of the Doctor, which has so many crucial elements to cover, with the title of the particular book Eleven is reading when Clara arrives, or with an extensive list of every companion who is seen photographed, because these things do not move the plot forward. And yet dumping links, I think, does little justice to any of it. It certainly offers no context just to provide the list of all those companions, because on loading those pages, their likeness showing up in a photograph is likely to be the last thing you'll see if you go searching.