Difference between revisions of "Talk:Race classification"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(what to make of this page) |
Fyzixfighter (talk | contribs) (reply) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I do see some potential for the "which side are aliens on" list, but maybe it works better as a table, listing the race name, their initial attitude, what attitudes they can take in the course of the game, and a comments column. — [[User:Svdb|SvdB]] 16:13, 2 June 2007 (CEST) | I do see some potential for the "which side are aliens on" list, but maybe it works better as a table, listing the race name, their initial attitude, what attitudes they can take in the course of the game, and a comments column. — [[User:Svdb|SvdB]] 16:13, 2 June 2007 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :The thing that bothers me about this and the [[Alien psychology]] page is that it is too subjective in its choice of grouping and classification to those groups. I do agree that the "Attitudes" section could be modified into a useful form. IMO the other information could be useful if there was a canon taxonomy, or a much discussed consensus of what the taxonomy would be, though the organization of this information in such a way does get a bit crufty (obsession with minutia and all that). Perhaps better kept in the namespace of the user who finds this interesting. --[[User:Fyzixfighter|Fyzixfighter]] 16:41, 2 June 2007 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 14:41, 2 June 2007
I'm not sure what to make of this page; is there really a use for a page like this? Especially the morphology section; it's all rather vague, and would there ever be a use to go to a page of all humanoid aliens?
I do see some potential for the "which side are aliens on" list, but maybe it works better as a table, listing the race name, their initial attitude, what attitudes they can take in the course of the game, and a comments column. — SvdB 16:13, 2 June 2007 (CEST)
- The thing that bothers me about this and the Alien psychology page is that it is too subjective in its choice of grouping and classification to those groups. I do agree that the "Attitudes" section could be modified into a useful form. IMO the other information could be useful if there was a canon taxonomy, or a much discussed consensus of what the taxonomy would be, though the organization of this information in such a way does get a bit crufty (obsession with minutia and all that). Perhaps better kept in the namespace of the user who finds this interesting. --Fyzixfighter 16:41, 2 June 2007 (CEST)