Talk:Corpse

I've created another page for Slang & Terminology called Exploit corpse. I found the original link to the non-existent exploit page in the minion article. After writing it, I linked all the necromancer corpse spells to my new page. In doing so, i found a corpse page. I don't think the old page is as complete and I felt the word "exploit" needed more explanation that the word "corpse," so I left my changes. In my opinion, we could delete this corpse page, as it doesn't really add anything extra. Other opinions are welcome, however. (By the way, I used "exploit corpse" instead of just "exploit" in order to avoid confusion with the more standard "game exploit" or cheat.) --Squeg 05:42, 11 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * The article as it exists now alleviates my concerns about redundancy adds benefit to the "slang and terminology list. Thanks. --Squeg 10:21, 11 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * I was thinking that everything in Corpse Exploitation should be merged into this article. Links could point directly at Corpse where applicable (once that section is made).  --Rezyk 13:39, 15 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * I believe the definition of a corpse goes beyond exploitation. Corpse can be mentioned in Skill capping and resurrection as well. I think Corpse and Exploit (Corpse) are two different articles.


 * Now, for exploitation, in general, verbs are our main terminology index. i.e. The article Corpse Exploitation is best created under Exploit (Corpse) and everything moved there. --Karlos 14:45, 15 Oct 2005 (EST)

There is no need for this article.
All relevant information exists under each individual topic and is only alluded to here. This is not a glossary article, it is a dictionary definition article. &mdash;Tanaric 07:39, 15 October 2006 (CDT)


 * I think we should move the contents of Corpse Exploitation here and add a list of corpse-related skills like we do for Enchantment, Hex, Condition and the articles for individual conditions. The fact that some monsters leave invisible corpses is relevant and non-intuitive. -- Gordon Ecker 04:56, 16 October 2006 (CDT)


 * I disagree. Corpse is the basic term, and it must stay. If anything, corpse exploitation should be turned into a redirect to corpse, not the other way round! --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 04:10, 18 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Ok, my opinion is stated above, if anyone bothered to read it. But anyhow, I RV'ed Skuld's redirect because frankly it was pretty trigger happy. Tanaric is discussing it here, the two people who answered both think it should stay and he up and moved it. I too diagree with deletion or redirecting. If anything, corpse exploitation should be here, plus other info (like corpses of bosses and so forth). --Karlos 06:37, 18 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Agreed - there's a difference between a corpse, exploting a corpse and skills that need a corpse. Leave it as it is, it's fine. --NieA7 06:39, 18 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Okay. I removed the delete tag. I disagree with moving corpse exploitation here. Corpse exploitation is very clear what it's about -- the exploitation of corpses. This article isn't really about corpses, per say -- it's also about corpse exploitation. That leads me to believe that corpse exploitation is the correct article title (though I wouldn't mind seeing it moved to exploit (corpse), to be more in line with other ambiguous article titles).


 * If consensus is against me, I'm fine with that, but I would like to see one or the other redirect somewhere. It seems pretty user-unfriendly to have an article which simply summarizes another article. &mdash;Tanaric 07:27, 18 October 2006 (CDT)