Talk:The Flagship - Revision history

Fyzixfighter: /* Since I just posted about this elsewhere */

2009-01-02T05:13:35Z

Since I just posted about this elsewhere

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:13, 2 January 2009
Line 5:		Line 5:
	It should either be referred to as "Vindicator" or "Flagship" (of the New Alliance of Free Stars), with the latter being the preferable choice.		It should either be referred to as "Vindicator" or "Flagship" (of the New Alliance of Free Stars), with the latter being the preferable choice.

			==Concerning spoilers and the Flagship==
	Friend Fyzixfighter,		Friend Fyzixfighter,

Line 35:		Line 35:

	:::Voicing my support for Fyzixfighter's idea. --[[User:Shiver\|Shiver]] 07:21, 31 December 2008 (CET)		:::Voicing my support for Fyzixfighter's idea. --[[User:Shiver\|Shiver]] 07:21, 31 December 2008 (CET)

			===First stab at rewriting===
			Ok, I tried to do a quick stab at rewriting the article. I didn't finish it because frankly, I'm getting tired and need to step away from it for awhile. I got as far as starting the 3rd paragraph in the history section before I had to stop - I tried to keep the important points in the history without getting overly detailed in tangents. I also didn't try to touch the armament section, though I do have some ideas of what I'd like to see in it. So feel free to add in what I missed or edit what's been done already. Maybe tomorrow I'll try again. Have fun. --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 06:13, 2 January 2009 (CET)

Shiver: /* Since I just posted about this elsewhere */

2008-12-31T06:21:41Z

Since I just posted about this elsewhere

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:21, 31 December 2008
Line 33:		Line 33:
	::Yeah it is kind of sparse. I'd recommend mimicking the other ship pages with a "Navigation" (discussion about the effects of turning jets and thrusters), "Armament" (damage and energy cost of the various weapons, salvo slot-dependence, PDL, ATS), and a "History" section. This would flesh out the article a bit better, make the article much more useful, and organize the information so that it's easily navigable and satisfies [[User:Polemos]]' concerns without the need for a spoiler warning.		::Yeah it is kind of sparse. I'd recommend mimicking the other ship pages with a "Navigation" (discussion about the effects of turning jets and thrusters), "Armament" (damage and energy cost of the various weapons, salvo slot-dependence, PDL, ATS), and a "History" section. This would flesh out the article a bit better, make the article much more useful, and organize the information so that it's easily navigable and satisfies [[User:Polemos]]' concerns without the need for a spoiler warning.
	::However, I do agree with Val that we don't need to merge in the various module pages. I do think (and I didn't always think this) a much more reasonable thing to do would be to merge the flagship module pages into the [[List of Flagship Modules]]. If the pages themselves can serve a unique, stand-alone purpose that the list can't, then they would warrant individual pages. However, I don't see what that purpose could be (and I can't seem to recall my initial aversion to such a merge). --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 22:42, 29 December 2008 (CET)		::However, I do agree with Val that we don't need to merge in the various module pages. I do think (and I didn't always think this) a much more reasonable thing to do would be to merge the flagship module pages into the [[List of Flagship Modules]]. If the pages themselves can serve a unique, stand-alone purpose that the list can't, then they would warrant individual pages. However, I don't see what that purpose could be (and I can't seem to recall my initial aversion to such a merge). --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 22:42, 29 December 2008 (CET)

			:::Voicing my support for Fyzixfighter's idea. --[[User:Shiver\|Shiver]] 07:21, 31 December 2008 (CET)

Fyzixfighter: /* Since I just posted about this elsewhere */ my thoughts

2008-12-29T21:42:41Z

Since I just posted about this elsewhere: my thoughts

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:42, 29 December 2008
Line 30:		Line 30:

	:I've added the List of modules in the See also part for now (as it's particularly relevant for the subject). I don't really see a need to merge this page with the flagship module pages — all that would do is make this page ugly. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 17:40, 24 December 2008 (CET)		:I've added the List of modules in the See also part for now (as it's particularly relevant for the subject). I don't really see a need to merge this page with the flagship module pages — all that would do is make this page ugly. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 17:40, 24 December 2008 (CET)

			::Yeah it is kind of sparse. I'd recommend mimicking the other ship pages with a "Navigation" (discussion about the effects of turning jets and thrusters), "Armament" (damage and energy cost of the various weapons, salvo slot-dependence, PDL, ATS), and a "History" section. This would flesh out the article a bit better, make the article much more useful, and organize the information so that it's easily navigable and satisfies [[User:Polemos]]' concerns without the need for a spoiler warning.
			::However, I do agree with Val that we don't need to merge in the various module pages. I do think (and I didn't always think this) a much more reasonable thing to do would be to merge the flagship module pages into the [[List of Flagship Modules]]. If the pages themselves can serve a unique, stand-alone purpose that the list can't, then they would warrant individual pages. However, I don't see what that purpose could be (and I can't seem to recall my initial aversion to such a merge). --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 22:42, 29 December 2008 (CET)

Valaggar: reply

2008-12-24T16:40:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:40, 24 December 2008
Line 28:		Line 28:

	This article looks a little sparse. Couldn't we merge the flagship module pages into here? --[[User:Shiver\|Shiver]] 00:37, 24 December 2008 (CET)		This article looks a little sparse. Couldn't we merge the flagship module pages into here? --[[User:Shiver\|Shiver]] 00:37, 24 December 2008 (CET)

			:I've added the List of modules in the See also part for now (as it's particularly relevant for the subject). I don't really see a need to merge this page with the flagship module pages — all that would do is make this page ugly. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 17:40, 24 December 2008 (CET)

Shiver at 23:37, 23 December 2008

2008-12-23T23:37:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:37, 23 December 2008
Line 25:		Line 25:

	:I've replied on [[User talk:Fyzixfighter#Concerning_the_Flagship\|my talk page]]. --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 18:47, 22 December 2008 (CET)		:I've replied on [[User talk:Fyzixfighter#Concerning_the_Flagship\|my talk page]]. --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 18:47, 22 December 2008 (CET)


			This article looks a little sparse. Couldn't we merge the flagship module pages into here? --[[User:Shiver\|Shiver]] 00:37, 24 December 2008 (CET)

Fyzixfighter at 17:47, 22 December 2008

2008-12-22T17:47:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:47, 22 December 2008
Line 23:		Line 23:

	Thank you.		Thank you.

			:I've replied on [[User talk:Fyzixfighter#Concerning_the_Flagship\|my talk page]]. --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 18:47, 22 December 2008 (CET)

Polemos: Friend Fyzixfighter,

2008-12-20T22:31:48Z

Friend Fyzixfighter,

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:31, 20 December 2008
Line 4:		Line 4:

	It should either be referred to as "Vindicator" or "Flagship" (of the New Alliance of Free Stars), with the latter being the preferable choice.		It should either be referred to as "Vindicator" or "Flagship" (of the New Alliance of Free Stars), with the latter being the preferable choice.


			Friend Fyzixfighter,

			I have added a -spoiler warning- in this part of the wiki. I acted in good faith as you already understood. I read the main page about the spoilers section after you have repaired my addition(spoiler warning).

			This is not my wiki to control and I respect that. Allow me to express my disagreement though.

			Concerning the part about the destruction of the flagship, what exactly does it serve?

			You, or someone, might say "hey this is a plot element of the flagship", yes I agree with that. Why don't you add a plot section(like in wikipedia)? You can put all the spoilers in a plot section.

			I went in the flagship part because I had a question concerning the sideway guns and instead I found that the ship is going to be destroyed. Whenever I go to (for example)wikipedia to check if a movie is good, I skip the plot and I check the criticism and the general receive of the press. Here, in this article, how could I ever skip it?

			What is the purpose of giving information for a weapon system (in the game) to someone who doesn't know the game, when in the same time you throw him spoilers?

			Don't get me wrong, I understand the "spoiler policy" of this wiki, does this wiki understand how to manage it's "spoiler policy" though?

			Thank you.

130.58.225.137 at 22:49, 13 April 2005

2005-04-13T22:49:53Z

New page

==Since I just posted about this elsewhere==

SIS should definitely not be the primary name. It's never actually used in the game's *text*, which is the actual canon source -- what it's called in the source code, which is not part of the *finished game itself* (not part of the experience of playing the game), is irrelevant, even if it's a convenient term for fans to throw around.

It should either be referred to as "Vindicator" or "Flagship" (of the New Alliance of Free Stars), with the latter being the preferable choice.