17
edits
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shrine (disambiguation)"
Talk:Shrine (disambiguation) (view source)
Revision as of 22:31, 29 April 2008
, 22:31, 29 April 2008no edit summary
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:I'm sorry, but I don't see that at all. Given there -are- other Chroniclers - several tens of them - there is no excuse for the minimal content addition over that timeframe of which you speak if content is important to them in the least bit. Looks like to me the concern is near-completely absent, so the next best thing is to just work on what someone actually has expressed having an issue with and tried to solve (namely me and consistency), even if it is "minor". In any case, it is impossible for something to be done at the expense of something else when the latter is already dreadfully minimal. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 06:05, 29 April 2008 (GMT) | :I'm sorry, but I don't see that at all. Given there -are- other Chroniclers - several tens of them - there is no excuse for the minimal content addition over that timeframe of which you speak if content is important to them in the least bit. Looks like to me the concern is near-completely absent, so the next best thing is to just work on what someone actually has expressed having an issue with and tried to solve (namely me and consistency), even if it is "minor". In any case, it is impossible for something to be done at the expense of something else when the latter is already dreadfully minimal. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 06:05, 29 April 2008 (GMT) | ||
::To say nothing of the denizens issue. You have yet to, after several months, reach any agreement about what "content" even is (or what kind of "content" is appropriate) in that regards, so how can you expect valuable contributions? --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 06:09, 29 April 2008 (GMT) | ::To say nothing of the denizens issue. You have yet to, after several months, reach any agreement about what "content" even is (or what kind of "content" is appropriate) in that regards, so how can you expect valuable contributions? --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 06:09, 29 April 2008 (GMT) | ||
:::In regards to your first point, to say it nicely, the reason it is not impossible for said something to be done at the expense of what is dreadfully minimal is because it (grammar preoccupation and they way it is implemented) is the very reason for the minimalism. I do not think it appropriate to clarify this on a public forum, so would be happy to discuss it with you otherwise out of courtesy to you. | |||
:::In regards to your second post, I like to think that after what has been decided on the forums, this should not be too difficult to figure out. As a chronicler, you should already be armed with this kind of judgment about what makes an article substantial and what makes it superficial. If you are unsure about something, feel free to discuss it with someone else. If I or another Head Chronicler doesn't like it, we'll take it out. If we do like it, we'll leave it. Pretty simple! [[User:Asara|Asara]] 22:31, 29 April 2008 (GMT) | |||
:Also regarding your first comment, thanks for the note, although the redundancy doesn't show so removing the extra categorization/placing the extra one is irrelevant. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 17:31, 26 April 2008 (GMT) | :Also regarding your first comment, thanks for the note, although the redundancy doesn't show so removing the extra categorization/placing the extra one is irrelevant. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 17:31, 26 April 2008 (GMT) | ||
::That doesn't make it any less redundant. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 17:42, 26 April 2008 (GMT) | ::That doesn't make it any less redundant. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 17:42, 26 April 2008 (GMT) | ||