Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Adventurer races"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*3) [[Satyrs]] and [[Atavians]] should be moved to singular ([[Satyr]] and [[Atavian]]) like the other race pages. (I'm kind of ambivalent about whether [[Greater Dragons]] needs to be moved, though..) | *3) [[Satyrs]] and [[Atavians]] should be moved to singular ([[Satyr]] and [[Atavian]]) like the other race pages. (I'm kind of ambivalent about whether [[Greater Dragons]] needs to be moved, though..) | ||
--[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 05:41, 19 January 2008 (GMT) | --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 05:41, 19 January 2008 (GMT) | ||
I just transferred this from somewhere else when it was shifted to a category, do as you want with it in regards to it. [[User:Corvax|Corvax]] | |||
Revision as of 06:59, 20 January 2008
A few opinions I have about things:
- 1) The race pages are all triple-linked. Ew. Basically, I think all race links can be removed because the articles are categorised here already and forcibly linked as a result. (That means the whole "The adventurer races are: Dwarf, Human..." first sentence can be deleted.)
- 2) The "racial (dis)advantages" column on the chart is meaningless. Humans have racial advantages, so essentially every race should end up getting marked with a "Y".
- 3) Satyrs and Atavians should be moved to singular (Satyr and Atavian) like the other race pages. (I'm kind of ambivalent about whether Greater Dragons needs to be moved, though..)
--Krypton 05:41, 19 January 2008 (GMT)
I just transferred this from somewhere else when it was shifted to a category, do as you want with it in regards to it. Corvax