Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1738746-20150714113923/@comment-26213507-20150715201427

Bluesonic1 wrote: I fear splitting the trivia section into trivia and notes in case this encourages people to write even longer theory-pieces under the notes section (as having a notes section kinda lends to this). If people don't have too much of an issue with longer writings however, then it could be a good idea to split the sections and put the notes section in a show/hide box much like long bug sections do.

And thank you for highlighting the difference between trivia and note, I was unaware of this. Again though, if I must be honest, I think splitting the sections might end up looking rather ugly/cluttered on articles, and for a reason I don't think many users know of (the difference you just explained). It seems like it would just look bad to have two headings with basically nothing under both rather than just combining the two. Perhaps we can consider changing "Trivia" to "Trivia and Notes"?

I have come across trivia that make me think "Gee, thanks for pointing out the obvious", such as "It shares its effect with the Conjure Flame Atronach spell." in the trivia section on the Staff of the Flame Atronach article. The problem with this is we're going into somewhat subjective territory. What may be obvious to one, may not be to another. If someone who was completely new to Skyrim or even the TES series reads that, they may not have known that such a spell existed. Though to be fair, I think that point should be in the intro paragraph considering how important it is to note i.e. "This staff does this which is the equivalent of this spell". I think a better parameter should be used to control for nonsense additions to the trivia section as opposed to "This is too obvious" as the phrase is subjective. Perhaps something like "A trivia point should not be repeating things that are already written elsewhere in the article"? As an example, this would stop additions like "This is a staff", "This staff does XYZ" or "X person gives you this staff" being added. Those edditions seem reasonable. I also feel that some info in trivia should be in the article, including the obvious, unless the article is extremely long, in which case the obvious is better omitted.