Talk:Zoom level - Revision history

Valaggar at 17:28, 3 June 2007

2007-06-03T17:28:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:28, 3 June 2007
Line 4:		Line 4:

	:I agree. This term does not appear anywhere in the canon (usually my criterion for inclusion) and is more cruft than anything else. Some of the information could (emphasis on ''could'' - not ''should'') be merged to a some kind of "XXX Mechanics" page, though what kind of mechanics page is beyond me (Navigation maybe?), but still seems a little crufty. The only things of value (IMO) are the comments in the last two sentences correlating the edge of entry with SIS orientation, which again could go into a "Nav Mech" page (though I'm not advocating the creation of such of page). --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (CEST)		:I agree. This term does not appear anywhere in the canon (usually my criterion for inclusion) and is more cruft than anything else. Some of the information could (emphasis on ''could'' - not ''should'') be merged to a some kind of "XXX Mechanics" page, though what kind of mechanics page is beyond me (Navigation maybe?), but still seems a little crufty. The only things of value (IMO) are the comments in the last two sentences correlating the edge of entry with SIS orientation, which again could go into a "Nav Mech" page (though I'm not advocating the creation of such of page). --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (CEST)

			::Having a complete "Game mechanics" category is nice. Merging is necessary, however - at least after we have enough material, of course. [[User:Valaggar\|Valaggar]] 19:28, 3 June 2007 (CEST)

Fyzixfighter: agreement

2007-06-02T03:55:41Z

agreement

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:55, 2 June 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	In my opinion, a criteria for inclusion in the Ultronomicon should be whether the contents might actually be of some value to the reader. This one fails miserably. I propose to delete. — [[User:Svdb\|SvdB]] 02:04, 2 June 2007 (CEST)		In my opinion, a criteria for inclusion in the Ultronomicon should be whether the contents might actually be of some value to the reader. This one fails miserably. I propose to delete. — [[User:Svdb\|SvdB]] 02:04, 2 June 2007 (CEST)

			:I agree. This term does not appear anywhere in the canon (usually my criterion for inclusion) and is more cruft than anything else. Some of the information could (emphasis on ''could'' - not ''should'') be merged to a some kind of "XXX Mechanics" page, though what kind of mechanics page is beyond me (Navigation maybe?), but still seems a little crufty. The only things of value (IMO) are the comments in the last two sentences correlating the edge of entry with SIS orientation, which again could go into a "Nav Mech" page (though I'm not advocating the creation of such of page). --[[User:Fyzixfighter\|Fyzixfighter]] 05:55, 2 June 2007 (CEST)

Svdb: Proposal for deletion

2007-06-02T00:04:42Z

Proposal for deletion

New page

Isn't this getting a little ridiculous?

In my opinion, a criteria for inclusion in the Ultronomicon should be whether the contents might actually be of some value to the reader. This one fails miserably. I propose to delete. — [[User:Svdb|SvdB]] 02:04, 2 June 2007 (CEST)