From Hastur
Jump to: navigation, search


I do not agree with the "See the campaign pages" idea. I built this section, and its for my games. I'll continue to use it as I do now. --Starfox

I want general pages to be egoless. That's why I removed the prase "my rules and mine alone". If the page is called D&D, it should be useful for all (local) D&D players. I don't see why we shouldn't be able to include Panzerman's rules in these pages as long as we implement a system that indicates which rule is used by which GM. This will be easier to maintain than separate pages like "D&D by Starfox" and "D&D by Panzerman". It will also be far easier to get an overview of all D&D rules if they are gathered on one page. --Urban 10:10, 23 May 2007 (CEST)
I think the best way then would be to have a separate category (maybe called AD&D) for my rules. That category could then include all my rule edits, and have in icon linking it t its own main page. After all, most of the rules categorization here is mine, so that is what the wiki should service. At least until someone else starts to use it seriously. --Abbe 12:47, 24 May 2007 (CEST)
I think that DPL and not categories is the way to go. I don't think there is a good reason to add author specific categories. Multiple D&D categories (D&D and Abbe D&D) will mean extra maintenance, even more so when we start subdividing the categories (D&D rules, D&D spells, etc.). It is probably better to rework the Approved template to indicate pages used by a particular GM and change the name link in the template so that it links to the approved page list rather than the used page. Dynamic Page List will handle the problems, it's just a question of setting up the index pages.--Urban 13:07, 24 May 2007 (CEST)
The problem with this is that there is no main page for my rules variants under this system. And if we create an auto-generated "main page", it will lack structure.--Abbe 10:00, 25 May 2007 (CEST)
Let's keep the current structure and ignore the problem. Actually, I don't think it's a problem at all. I have no objection to a separate main page for your D&D rules, but I think you should continue to use the main one. Like you said, you are the main D&D contributor. I'm lazy and I want to work on other projects on the wiki, so it's easier to use the current structure. :) I don't think we will have a problem as long as you're OK with the occasional prestige class or other rule by other GM:s. Those pages can of course use a separate template. --Urban 12:23, 25 May 2007 (CEST)
That might work, at least until someone else starts to work seriously here.--Abbe 15:01, 25 May 2007 (CEST)

What I DO suggest is that rules applicable to specific campaigns be categorized by campaign - that gives us an indication under each rule what games it is for. --Starfox

I think it's better to keep the rules campaign neutral and link to the rules pages from the campaign specific pages. We've discussed some sort of "approved by" display. Using a bot script to add this to all D&D pages is fairly easy, so we would only have to to this on a few pages as a test. --Urban 10:10, 23 May 2007 (CEST)
The easy way to do an "approved by" is to add the campaign category/icon to the rules page where they are applicable.--Abbe 11:40, 23 May 2007 (CEST)

External links

The wizard spell list link goes to a protected google page. Please change the label to indicate this. --Urban 14:59, 25 May 2007 (CEST)

Don't understand this. --Abbe 09:20, 26 May 2007 (CEST)
This is the last link in the "External Links" section: Wizard Spell List I can't access this Google page. I think it's bad form to list protected links without indicating that they are protected. --Urban 10:03, 26 May 2007 (CEST)