For a long time I have been misremembering the Manual of Style rule regarding the perspective of articles. I have been writing under the impression that I shouldn't point out that something is fictional when in fact it should have been in the first sentence. That being said I personally prefer to read a page that carries the In Mythos banner instead and only uses a real world perspective under the Behind the mythos section. Ironically the best example of this is the Cthulhu page which, despite being the example used by the manual of style, is largely written from an in mythos perspective. It manages to maintain the air of mystery and solidity it deserves without losing that literary stance. I'm not suggesting some sort of massive overhaul (I know I say that every time) but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
I've been thinking about this stance also.
Note that I'm currently removing the In-Mythos banner from everywhere, I found it unnecessary: eery article is to be considered in-universe unless it has a real-world icon at the top.
Personally I also think that we should write in-universe unless we have the real-world icon at the top.
I'll wait for others' feedback before changing this part of the manual of style.
My apologies. I re-read the Manual of Style rule regarding the perspective of articles, and I've seen that is not how I wrote the 100+ articles that I've created in this wiki (e.g. Shuma-Gorath).
Fixing them is going to take lots of work, but I can do it though I ask that you guys be patient. It's going to take me months to fix them all.
Now this apply to only the "In-Mythos" pages, or does it also apply to the "Adjacent Works"? Likewise does it apply to the "Mythos influenced works"?
No need to apologise, you followed the rules of the site, we're just wondering if those should still be the rules. Given that the Adjacent Works and Influenced works are party of the Greater Cthulhu Mythos they would be included. I realise that its a bit of a slog but if we're careful i think we can avoid losing any information. For example:
| “ | Cancerverse is a fictional universe in the Marvel Multiverse, one of the realities conquered by the Many-Angled Ones. It appeared in Thanos Imperative mini-series in 2010. | „ |
Would become:
| “ | Cancerverse is an alternative reality conquered by the Many-Angled Ones in the Marvel Multiverse.
Moved to infobox > [Appearances: Thanos Imperative (2010)] | „ |
While a slightly more fleshed out intro might be ideal this would hopefully be a quicker fix. At the end of the day I talk a lot about restructuring but I don't want to waste anyone's time. Assuming we're agreed that non real world articles will be now written from an in universe perpective, I reckon that those months would be better spent creating new articles in the new style and restructuring past ones gradually.