GuildWiki talk:Use lower case

No offense, but is this really soooo important that it must be added to the "Six key ideas for editing the GuildWiki"? To me, this is just one among many other formating rules that can be covered in Style and formatting. It seems out of place between the other 5 key ideas, which are more of an ethical guideline. --Fisherman's Friend 07:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. --Karlos 07:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * You've caught my personal bias. Yes, it's that important&mdash;especially since nobody does it!  But you're right, it doesn't fit.  *sigh* &mdash;Tanaric 15:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Can somebody point me towards the talk page where this rule has been decided? Because ... I want to challenge that decision! --Fisherman's Friend 08:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * This is just, at the moment, a tradition we've written down. Unfortunately, these articles are getting swamped in the Chapter 2 crud. Michael's recollection of it is:
 * Tanaric: Hnnrgh! There is improper article capitalisation everywhere! I want to change it all!
 * Nu/Grave/Biro: Sounds fine, knock yourself out.
 * ..and so was born the Case Crusade. ;p --Nunix 14:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If you wish to change this tradition, this is the appropriate place to present your argument. &mdash;Tanaric 14:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm hugely in favor of lower case for page names as much as possible, and most of the rest of this article. I *know* I've complained about that here before, long ago.  (Or was the UrbanDead?)  Anyway, there's my vote. --JoDiamonds 05:59, 8 March 2006 (CST)


 * Ooh, UrbanWiki. Brings back memories.  69.124.143.230 06:03, 8 March 2006 (CST)


 * I have to agree. At first I was against it, but it just makes sense.  And clears up ambiguity.  Of course, if it's a proper noun, teh whole thing should be capitalized.  Teh!  69.124.143.230 06:03, 8 March 2006 (CST)

While I'm busy questioning the basic rules of GuildWiki to get us ready for Factions, I might as well question this one too. IMO the lowercase rule is the single most responsible reasons for broken/wrong links on GuildWiki, and hence we should reconsider it. Because of the fact that ANet capitalized most nouns (not just proper names) in ingame "labels", and since we agreed to use the ingame spelling, the vast majority of articles on GuildWiki has all nouns in upper case. This makes the rule "use lower case" kinda pointless. We'd probably have much less confusion if we'd simply follow ANet's pattern and capitalize all nouns (not just proper names) in all article names as well as category names.

Two (fictional) example, to make clear what I mean: Please tell me, which words shall be lower case, which shall be upper case?
 * category:(E)nchantment (S)pells by (S)kill (T)rainer (L)ocation
 * category:(P)et (R)esurrection (S)pells by (Q)uest (G)iver (L)ocation

I'd rather have a simple, 100% clear rule, even if it's not 100% according to proper English grammar sometimes. We shall put it to a vote. It the majority decides to keep the current rule, fine.

Vote

 * Option 1:Keep the current rule, even if is unclear sometimes.
 * 1) Your vote here
 * Option 2:Simplify the current rule and capitalize all nouns in all article and category names.
 * 1) Rainith
 * 2) Xeeron (but have redirects, see below)
 * 3) Your vote here
 * Option 3:Other (specify)
 * 1) Your vote here
 * Option 3:Other (specify)
 * 1) Your vote here

Redirects
Maybe I should not open a can of worms that does not belong here, but given the problems with different article capitalisations, I see our policy of not creating redirects (and even deleting some) for other spelling as very problematic. From the forum and several talk pages here I get it that this is the most common problem of users, so why not have an array of redirects that directly bring you to the correct page if you misscapitalized. At least we should stop deleting those "unnecessary redirects". --Xeeron 01:25, 16 March 2006 (CST)
 * This is what I see is the biggest problem with this idea (from the Main Page):
 * We are currently maintaining 4,874 articles...
 * Even taking into account that say half of those articles have only 1 word in their name, that would still leave almost 2500 redirects which I see as pointless. Especially now that the search function has been re-enabled, more redirects seems like a waste to me.  --Rainith 01:48, 16 March 2006 (CST)