Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 35: |
Line 35: |
| are worthy of their own articles. There may be more, but I am too lazy to check the rest. | | are worthy of their own articles. There may be more, but I am too lazy to check the rest. |
| [[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] | | [[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] |
| :[[Squirpina XIV]] seems to have enough content to be notable, there's even a picture available (What makes her implied then?). - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 09:21, 25 November 2007 (EST)
| |
| :: Ah yeah, that's a good article, keep it too. I think Squirpina is categorised as Implied since she is never directly seen, only a statue of her.
| |
| [[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]]
| |
| :::How about the Croacuses?{{User:Knife/sig}} 22:50, 15 December 2007 (EST)
| |
| ::::I didn't merge them because unlike, say [[Old Man Skoo]], we know what they did before the events of the game and we know at least some of their history, making them more than thrown-away mention. (Speaking of Implied, I checked back throught the [[List of Implied Characters]], and I think the Bog Monster is worthy of his own article, anyone agree?)
| |
| [[User:Blitzwing|Blitzwing]]
| |
|
| |
| =="Implied" category on Redirects==
| |
| Okay, I was thinking I may get reverted, so let's discuss it here... If the category is supposed to stay on redirects, then we should probably add it to all the redirects missing it. However, this would horribly bloat the Implied category, so they should be sub-categorized. [[User:Redstar|Redstar]] 10:12, 17 December 2009 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| ==Categorization==
| |
| Okay, this is what I want to do: create a category for each type of implied (Implied People, Implied Locations, etc.) and create a string of categories, so when you go to Category:Implied you have only the eight Lists of Implied X. Once you click one of those Lists, it takes you to a sub-category with all the articles found in that List (provided on the redirect pages). I think this would result in a better organized and cleaner system. Thoughts? [[User:Redstar|Redstar]] 04:38, 19 December 2009 (EST)
| |
| :Yes, that's how it's supposed to be, I think. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 06:16, 19 December 2009 (EST)
| |
| ::I've just started working on this new categorization system. It may seem off at first, but anyone that notices please wait until I'm finished when you can see what it's actually doing. [[User:Redstar|Redstar]] 16:41, 19 December 2009 (EST)
| |