v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.
Editing v0.31 Talk:Black diamond
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in.
Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
You are editing a page for an older version of Dwarf Fortress ("Main" is the current version, not "v0.31"). Please make sure you intend to do this. If you are here by mistake, see the current page instead.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
::I vote make it masterwork. "Masterwork" to me implies a pleasingly formatted, informationally complete article, and this qualifies. What is there left to add? Even the paragraph description currently on the page is redundant, as all that information can be found within the table. I say keep em' both, so the table-lovers and paragraph lovers can both be happy, and call it complete. EDIT: An added thought. The quality system is meant to be used in order to let editors know which articles need attention, correct? Even if it is short, this article is complete and doesn't need attention. [[User:JohnnyMadhouse|JohnnyMadhouse]] 20:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC) | ::I vote make it masterwork. "Masterwork" to me implies a pleasingly formatted, informationally complete article, and this qualifies. What is there left to add? Even the paragraph description currently on the page is redundant, as all that information can be found within the table. I say keep em' both, so the table-lovers and paragraph lovers can both be happy, and call it complete. EDIT: An added thought. The quality system is meant to be used in order to let editors know which articles need attention, correct? Even if it is short, this article is complete and doesn't need attention. [[User:JohnnyMadhouse|JohnnyMadhouse]] 20:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::This might be true, but if so then every other gem, tree, stone and whatnot article should be masterwork, because all of them have such tables in the side with all of the raw info. This to me isn't quite right. I, personally wouldn't give more than an Exceptional, unless there is something special to this article over all the other articles with a little description and a template table. Also this article could still have added some things, don't really know what exactly, but it sure doesn't feel complete. [[User:Speed112|Speed112]] 00:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC) | :::This might be true, but if so then every other gem, tree, stone and whatnot article should be masterwork, because all of them have such tables in the side with all of the raw info. This to me isn't quite right. I, personally wouldn't give more than an Exceptional, unless there is something special to this article over all the other articles with a little description and a template table. Also this article could still have added some things, don't really know what exactly, but it sure doesn't feel complete. [[User:Speed112|Speed112]] 00:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− |