Talk:Very Rare IO Sets: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Colonel Jasmine (historical) (New page: This seems more appropriate as an article than a category so I made an article for it. Good idea. :) -- Sekoia 02:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC) :My preference actually would be to have both. ...) |
imported>Sekoia (historical) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:My preference actually would be to have both. IMO the two pages (my original and Sekoia's rework) fulfill distinct needs; a category would be a clickable list of everything in the category of minimal length, and an article would give full factual detail and be longer. Is that OK with people, two pages? --[[User:Colonel Jasmine|Colonel Jasmine]] 20:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC) | :My preference actually would be to have both. IMO the two pages (my original and Sekoia's rework) fulfill distinct needs; a category would be a clickable list of everything in the category of minimal length, and an article would give full factual detail and be longer. Is that OK with people, two pages? --[[User:Colonel Jasmine|Colonel Jasmine]] 20:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC) | ||
:: Normally, rarity applies at the individual Recipe level, not at the set level. So we have categories for the different types of rarities/drops that the individual recipes go in. These sets are unique in that the Very Rare status applies to all recipes in the set -- normally, a set has various rarities. I'm inclined to think that we should continue classifying the individual recipes by rarity, and not the sets. But, I'm not opposed to doing them the other way for these. Just need to update the templates and calls for them so they remain standardized. They kinda muck up our system, hehe. -- [[User:Sekoia|Sekoia]] 07:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:09, 23 January 2008
This seems more appropriate as an article than a category so I made an article for it. Good idea. :) -- Sekoia 02:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- My preference actually would be to have both. IMO the two pages (my original and Sekoia's rework) fulfill distinct needs; a category would be a clickable list of everything in the category of minimal length, and an article would give full factual detail and be longer. Is that OK with people, two pages? --Colonel Jasmine 20:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Normally, rarity applies at the individual Recipe level, not at the set level. So we have categories for the different types of rarities/drops that the individual recipes go in. These sets are unique in that the Very Rare status applies to all recipes in the set -- normally, a set has various rarities. I'm inclined to think that we should continue classifying the individual recipes by rarity, and not the sets. But, I'm not opposed to doing them the other way for these. Just need to update the templates and calls for them so they remain standardized. They kinda muck up our system, hehe. -- Sekoia 07:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)