Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Disciplines"
Halethrain (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:Make a new page called Disciplines then copy all the information in the category page to that. Then it's a matter of updating places that link to the category, unless Rewen (who's better at the organization) has a more elegent solution --[[User:Halethrain|Halethrain]] 20:37, 4 February 2008 (EST) | :Make a new page called Disciplines then copy all the information in the category page to that. Then it's a matter of updating places that link to the category, unless Rewen (who's better at the organization) has a more elegent solution --[[User:Halethrain|Halethrain]] 20:37, 4 February 2008 (EST) | ||
::Well, it's not exactly redundant. There is a list of disciplines and a list of articles in the "Discipline" category. For example, if there was an article explaining the use of a discipline (IE. "Saboteur Tips") it would be in the second list and not in the first. But I see what you are saying. This was just an effort to work cooperatively with the wiki code, I'm not sure how I could improve upon it. --[[User:RewenX|Rewen]] 21:01, 4 February 2008 (EST) | ::Well, it's not exactly redundant. There is a list of disciplines and a list of articles in the "Discipline" category. For example, if there was an article explaining the use of a discipline (IE. "Saboteur Tips") it would be in the second list and not in the first. But I see what you are saying. This was just an effort to work cooperatively with the wiki code, I'm not sure how I could improve upon it. --[[User:RewenX|Rewen]] 21:01, 4 February 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | :::I'm pretty sure that I'm the one that created the new list for this page to match it up to what you already did for the class page. I just didn't create a new article for it. --[[User:Halethrain|Halethrain]] 21:31, 4 February 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 02:31, 5 February 2008
- Many of the discipline dropper locations are obsolete. It looks like new entries were added when they moved but the old entries were retained as well. It's spanking obvious when the microzone name does not match or the macrozone does not even exist anymore. Having two locations listed for one dropper is suggestive as well. --Vreejack 2006/09/29 2006
- The disciplines are listed twice, which is quite chaotic. Can't we remove the lower part, which lists everything in the category 'Disciplines'. Or is this automatic?--EvilJonas 08:54, 4 February 2008 (EST)
- The lower part is indeed generated automatically as this page is a "category". But the top list could be removed. --Zenjah 10:31, 4 February 2008 (EST)
- But the Profession and Base Class page doesn't have the 'category list'.--EvilJonas 10:50, 4 February 2008 (EST)
- Make a new page called Disciplines then copy all the information in the category page to that. Then it's a matter of updating places that link to the category, unless Rewen (who's better at the organization) has a more elegent solution --Halethrain 20:37, 4 February 2008 (EST)
- Well, it's not exactly redundant. There is a list of disciplines and a list of articles in the "Discipline" category. For example, if there was an article explaining the use of a discipline (IE. "Saboteur Tips") it would be in the second list and not in the first. But I see what you are saying. This was just an effort to work cooperatively with the wiki code, I'm not sure how I could improve upon it. --Rewen 21:01, 4 February 2008 (EST)
- I'm pretty sure that I'm the one that created the new list for this page to match it up to what you already did for the class page. I just didn't create a new article for it. --Halethrain 21:31, 4 February 2008 (EST)
- Well, it's not exactly redundant. There is a list of disciplines and a list of articles in the "Discipline" category. For example, if there was an article explaining the use of a discipline (IE. "Saboteur Tips") it would be in the second list and not in the first. But I see what you are saying. This was just an effort to work cooperatively with the wiki code, I'm not sure how I could improve upon it. --Rewen 21:01, 4 February 2008 (EST)
