| Archives | |
| /Archive 1 | |
Proposed S&F guide and split
Ok, although most of the location articles follow roughly the same format, we currently have nothing official as to how they should be. I've put my spin on it here (my test page). Take a look at it and let me know what you think. Note that this is for towns / outposts / mission locations only. The second part of this is that I think we should split the S&F article to GuildWiki:Style and formatting/Explorable locations and GuildWiki:Style and formatting/Urban locations. Now I know those probably aren't the best names but they get the idea accross. Hopefully some people will look at this and give feedback. :) --Rainith 00:40, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
- Looks good, just name it "towns" for short. Also, should have a Notes/Features section where stuff like statues of gods and/or monuments of significance can be mentioned. --Karlos 01:03, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
- Looks good :) I like the sound of location boxes! — Skuld
01:53, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
- Hubs vs Instances? Still get the idea across (i hope) and much shorter.-User:PanSola (talk to the
) 02:36, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
- Looks good. Are we going to see an example, or is there one allready? --
04:32, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
- Seems ok to me, I added "Getting There" to the example (which was left off for some reason). In the location box do we need to have an attribute to say it's Luxon or Kurzick controlled town (for those that this applies to) or will this be integrated into an existing attribute (presumably either parent = Region or type=Town or Outpost) ? --Xasxas256 08:18, 15 June 2006 (CDT)