17
edits
Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Vertan Denizens"
Category talk:Vertan Denizens (view source)
Revision as of 00:49, 21 February 2008
, 00:49, 21 February 2008no edit summary
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:::If we change [[:Category:Vertani Denizens]] to [[:Category:Vertani]], by default we would then have to move all Vertani from Historical Figures and Tir Murann into Vertani Denizens as well. (Which is fine if necessary...) You also may not necessarily assume [[:Category:Vertan Denizens]] specifically means someone living in Vertan for the other possibility I already previously stated. The reason for this is because not all [[Category:<Place> Denizens]] follow this outline as you insist, and unless the article description defines it at such, we cannot assume this is true (like for [[:Category:Vertan Denizens]]). Personally I wouldn't mind conforming them all to a consistent standard, but at the moment I am still not convinced that Kadran and Drafaris fit in Historical Denizens category as I have defined it. If you wish to change the prerequisites for this category, this is another matter entirely. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 20:01, 20 February 2008 (GMT) | :::If we change [[:Category:Vertani Denizens]] to [[:Category:Vertani]], by default we would then have to move all Vertani from Historical Figures and Tir Murann into Vertani Denizens as well. (Which is fine if necessary...) You also may not necessarily assume [[:Category:Vertan Denizens]] specifically means someone living in Vertan for the other possibility I already previously stated. The reason for this is because not all [[Category:<Place> Denizens]] follow this outline as you insist, and unless the article description defines it at such, we cannot assume this is true (like for [[:Category:Vertan Denizens]]). Personally I wouldn't mind conforming them all to a consistent standard, but at the moment I am still not convinced that Kadran and Drafaris fit in Historical Denizens category as I have defined it. If you wish to change the prerequisites for this category, this is another matter entirely. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 20:01, 20 February 2008 (GMT) | ||
::::"'''Historical Figures''' are past figures who were neither [[denizen]] nor [[adventurer]], or '''those denizens or [[:category:creatures|creatures]] lost to history'''." They are lost to history until they prove themselves otherwise; that may happen, but unless you know for sure they'll be making an appearance again, they are only known for their historical roles now. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 21:04, 20 February 2008 (GMT) | ::::"'''Historical Figures''' are past figures who were neither [[denizen]] nor [[adventurer]], or '''those denizens or [[:category:creatures|creatures]] lost to history'''." They are lost to history until they prove themselves otherwise; that may happen, but unless you know for sure they'll be making an appearance again, they are only known for their historical roles now. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 21:04, 20 February 2008 (GMT) | ||
:::::Hm. I am thinking the problem lies in the understanding of "historical" in which I think the appointment of denizens as a "historic character" should have established permanency in never coming back. In other words, I think the exact opposite of what you state: they are NOT lost to history until they prove themselves otherwise - if they are definitively lost to history and have absolutely no potential of coming back, only then should they be historical. This is why those who don't fit this distinction can still be placed in the world; for Kadran and Drafaris, they are Vertan Denizens (albeit wandering, although we do have a Wandering Denizens category). Now I know a lot of the current denizens moved in there may not fit this subjectivity, but that's because I don't have 24/7 to police every single article in there and I'm not the only Head Chronicler. If we want yet another huge overhaul re-categorisation, I'm willing to listen, but we're going to need to be very careful... [[User:Asara|Asara]] 00:49, 21 February 2008 (GMT) | |||