Talk:Kenshi Steelhand
Skills SoC confirmed May 7, 2007. - BeX 11:59, 14 May 2007 (EDT) I have never found kenshi steelhand and i followed map what should i do?
Destubbing[edit]
Mornin'! 1. [[Kenshi Steelhand]] is semantically wrong, even if it achieves the same end result as '''Kenshi Steelhand'''; you shouldn't be linking a page to itself just to bold the title. 2. Why readd the stub tag? Just because the map and picture? It was my impression (and hope) that the stub tag wouldn't be used as freely as on GuildWiki; I'd be far more comfortable with Wikipedia's definition of a stub article, "A stub is an article containing only a few sentences of text which is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, but not so short as to provide no useful information". The current article has all vital information, it's in my eyes no longer a stub. Thoughts? --Dirigible 11:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Evening. :P I had been taught to use that "feature" of mediawiki. As it stands we have no actual guidelines about it, and I use what I've been told is correct, and on the plus side it uses fewer characters. As for the stub, to me it means an incomplete article - and to me an article is not complete without the required image and I most definitely view that as "vital information". If there was a different method of defining when an article is complete or incomplete, then that would be preferable. There are plenty of long articles that are marked as stubs because the information in them is incorrect or needs research. Perhaps we should develop a different system for it. - BeX 11:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think that since this is a wiki, no article here can or should ever be considered complete; if that's the definition we're using we might as well add the stub tag to MediaWiki:Sitenotice so it shows up on every page; there'll always be content missing from articles. If you want a map to stop considering it a stub, maybe someone else wants instructions on how to kill the boss to consider it complete, (what good is knowing how to get to him if you can't kill him, right?). If BeXoR considers a picture of what the boss looks like important enough to keep it a stub, why shouldn't someone else require all lore background regarding what the boss is supposed to be before considering the article complete? And so on. Hence why I think we should just use the definition "{{stub}} is what you apply to an article if you can get to it before the {{redbetter}} guys". Hmm, this isn't convincing enough, is it? We may need to call in the cavalry. --Dirigible 11:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- What I think we need is a "needs image" template along with the stub one. When there is enough info to destub, the stub tag can be removed, and when there is an image, that one can be removed. I've been using the stub category as a reference for which articles need images, but if we make a separate category and template, that would solve all of the problems. :P - BeX 12:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Was just about to create that template when I noticed you'd already done so, {{image needed}}. Looks good to me! --Dirigible 20:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- What I think we need is a "needs image" template along with the stub one. When there is enough info to destub, the stub tag can be removed, and when there is an image, that one can be removed. I've been using the stub category as a reference for which articles need images, but if we make a separate category and template, that would solve all of the problems. :P - BeX 12:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think that since this is a wiki, no article here can or should ever be considered complete; if that's the definition we're using we might as well add the stub tag to MediaWiki:Sitenotice so it shows up on every page; there'll always be content missing from articles. If you want a map to stop considering it a stub, maybe someone else wants instructions on how to kill the boss to consider it complete, (what good is knowing how to get to him if you can't kill him, right?). If BeXoR considers a picture of what the boss looks like important enough to keep it a stub, why shouldn't someone else require all lore background regarding what the boss is supposed to be before considering the article complete? And so on. Hence why I think we should just use the definition "{{stub}} is what you apply to an article if you can get to it before the {{redbetter}} guys". Hmm, this isn't convincing enough, is it? We may need to call in the cavalry. --Dirigible 11:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
