Difference between revisions of "Talk:Mouse Group"

From MHWiki
(Specific Mouse Group pages - I am concerned about extra maintenance - what is the upside?)
(Specific Mouse Group pages)
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
::: I like the tribe page - because it is a good comparison of the various Tribal Islands. However unless there is value added, I am concerned about the additional maintenance involved every time we add a page. Currently we have to update the mouse page, the location page, the cheat sheet - so I would recommend not adding a new mouse type page unless there is further justification of why we need it. -- [[User:Ralphminer|Ralphminer]] 20:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 
::: I like the tribe page - because it is a good comparison of the various Tribal Islands. However unless there is value added, I am concerned about the additional maintenance involved every time we add a page. Currently we have to update the mouse page, the location page, the cheat sheet - so I would recommend not adding a new mouse type page unless there is further justification of why we need it. -- [[User:Ralphminer|Ralphminer]] 20:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
::::I'm waiting for 1) what you would like to put in those articles, and 2) explanation on the usefulness of such information.
 +
::::Also, please see my comments over here: [[Talk:Nerg Tribe]]. I suggested moving the info somewhere and making the page a redirect someplace. Because right now those articles are 1) repetitive (same info can be found in the appropriate location and other places), 2) not very visible, 3) too similar to the mouse group name (minus "The"). How many hits do they get? Nerg Tribe is #457 with 5,984 total views; the other two even worse. -- [[User:Camomiletea|camomiletea]] 00:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:47, 11 July 2010

Specific Mouse Group pages

I'm thinking of creating pages for the different Mouse groups. Not just the Category pages, but actual pages like Elub Tribe, Nerg Tribe and Derr Tribe. What you you people think? -- S18067 talkcontr 14:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't like it... I don't even like those existing Elub Tribe, Derr Tribe, Nerg Tribe articles. They simply repeat what can be found elsewhere... I don't know. For example I like Tribe which makes comparisons, makes a compilation of all the data relating to Tribes, but not the individual ones. I guess it would depend on what you plan to put into those articles. I feel that maybe instead of the separate articles, the Category pages should be expanded. If you have any extra information to put. Just one opinion, my 2 cents. -- camomiletea 14:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm..... Any ideas then on how we could expand the Category pages? They're generally just very simple pages. I was suggesting separate pages because people might want to look for all the information on a group without having to look through a decent number of pages. That was the only reason that I created the Tribe pages in the first place. I think we should brainstorm about this one. -- S18067 talkcontr 18:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
I like the tribe page - because it is a good comparison of the various Tribal Islands. However unless there is value added, I am concerned about the additional maintenance involved every time we add a page. Currently we have to update the mouse page, the location page, the cheat sheet - so I would recommend not adding a new mouse type page unless there is further justification of why we need it. -- Ralphminer 20:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm waiting for 1) what you would like to put in those articles, and 2) explanation on the usefulness of such information.
Also, please see my comments over here: Talk:Nerg Tribe. I suggested moving the info somewhere and making the page a redirect someplace. Because right now those articles are 1) repetitive (same info can be found in the appropriate location and other places), 2) not very visible, 3) too similar to the mouse group name (minus "The"). How many hits do they get? Nerg Tribe is #457 with 5,984 total views; the other two even worse. -- camomiletea 00:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)