Category talk:Boss stubs

I propose that any boss with a list of skills, a location, and a screenshot be removed from this category. What more can be said about generic bosses? &mdash;Tanaric 11:06, 17 October 2006 (CDT)


 * You're not aware of the debate that took place perhaps. The missing ingredient is SoC confirmation. also, the location should either include a map or specific details as to where in the area that monster is. --Karlos 11:24, 17 October 2006 (CDT)


 * That's true about the SoC confirmation. There are some bosses that have skills they don't use, or can only use under certain conditions. Maps and/or location details are optional in my book when I look to remove a boss stub, cause you already know the area they are in which is enough for me. But they can be good resources for a quick reference, for example if a user wanted to plan a route to run to a boss's location. &mdash; Gares 11:59, 17 October 2006 (CDT)


 * That Category:Needs SoC confirmation has only 10 bosses in it implies that nearly all bosses meet that criteria. &mdash;Tanaric 13:45, 17 October 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't think anyone ever paid attention to that category. Yesterday I worked on my crusade and I had to add that category to 3 or 4 bosses and it was only Charr. &mdash; Gares 13:59, 17 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Gares, I disagree on the location. Telling someone that a boss is in Perdition Rock or Rhea's Crater is useful info, but it not the best information you can give them. There is no shame in keeping a boss article a stub. However, removing a stub label from an article infers completeness. Location info is important, if not critical. I would agree that it's not as important for bosses without elites, but for bosses with elites, at least a text description of which area (west/northeast/...) is indeed important. --Karlos 14:32, 17 October 2006 (CDT)