Category talk:Historical Figures - Revision history

ZHOUY1 at 20:19, 16 June 2015

2015-06-16T20:19:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:19, 16 June 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
	:::can I make it a chart? [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 08:34, 16 June 2015 (CDT)		:::can I make it a chart? [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 08:34, 16 June 2015 (CDT)
			::::Making it look nicer is good, so long as it's still easy to maintain. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:19, 16 June 2015 (CDT)

VANKRASN39 at 13:34, 16 June 2015

2015-06-16T13:34:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 June 2015
Line 2:		Line 2:
	:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
	::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
			:::can I make it a chart? [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 08:34, 16 June 2015 (CDT)

VANKRASN39 at 20:56, 12 June 2015

2015-06-12T20:56:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:56, 12 June 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
	:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
			::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)

ZHOUY1 at 20:52, 12 June 2015

2015-06-12T20:52:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 12 June 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
			:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)

VANKRASN39 at 20:23, 12 June 2015

2015-06-12T20:23:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:23, 12 June 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)

VANKRASN39: sorting idea

2015-06-12T20:20:57Z

sorting idea

New page

A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. [[User:VANKRASN39|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:19, 16 June 2015
Line 3:		Line 3:
	::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
	:::can I make it a chart? [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 08:34, 16 June 2015 (CDT)		:::can I make it a chart? [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 08:34, 16 June 2015 (CDT)
			::::Making it look nicer is good, so long as it's still easy to maintain. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:19, 16 June 2015 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:34, 16 June 2015
Line 2:		Line 2:
	:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
	::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
			:::can I make it a chart? [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 08:34, 16 June 2015 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:56, 12 June 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		A little tedious, but only 91 pages. What do people think about sorting the historical figures by race or culture? This would be done on the individual pages in the category code. Faendryl for example would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|F]]</nowiki> and Illistim would be <nowiki>[[Category: Historical Figures\|I]]</nowiki>. G for giant, V for Vaalor, D for dwarfs, H for halfling, T for humans (Turamzzyrian), N for gnome (maybe?). Chart would be posted on the category page. ICE age figures should have their own letter I think. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:20, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
	:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)		:I can see a good case for making an organized list with sections and linking it from (or putting it on) the category page. It would be easier than fixing every single article, probably more intuitive to read, and allows for putting more information by the link than just the name of the article. [[User:ZHOUY1\|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1\|talk]]) 15:52, 12 June 2015 (CDT)
			::I like that idea, too. Even better. [[User:VANKRASN39\|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39\|talk]]) 15:56, 12 June 2015 (CDT)