Allowing "too weak" character profile related to a team added in the wiki

[Antvasima]

Can somebody remind me regarding what exactly that should be applied based on this thread, please?

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody remind me regarding what exactly that should be applied based on this thread, please?

@Mariogoods

 

[Mariogoods]

As I said, I agree with DT's idea. Just slap something into the Members section that allows for generally powerless individuals to be noted. If they are named, by all means just... list a name. Otherwise, I'd list these powerless individuals as [number] [group name]. "28 bodyguards". "7 knights". Etc. The only thing that would need changed for the Standard Format is specifically noting that such a thing is allowed.

@Mariogoods

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I think that seems uncontroversial to apply.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Okay. I think that seems uncontroversial to apply.

Can we apply it now?

 

[Starter_Pack]

Definitely. We just need someone to write up the note for the Standard Format page, post it, and we're good.

 

[Antvasima]

Can we apply it now?

Definitely. We just need someone to write up the note for the Standard Format page, post it, and we're good.

@Mariogoods @ImmortalDread

Are either of you willing to handle it please?

 

[ImmortalDread]

I need to read the thread entirely to handle it. It may take time.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. No problem. Thank you for helping out.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Reading through the thread, I suppose, everyone agreed with DT, so I will try to create simple concise note(s):

This is the current note in the page:

Additionally, teams must also be official in-verse i.e. referred to as such by characters within the verse, and possess a team name or an analogous term, as well as being notable and prominent. This is to ensure excessively minor team-ups aren't indexed, and thus bloat the wiki.

I will expand it like this:

Additionally, teams must also be official in-verse i.e. referred to as such by characters within the verse, and possess a team name or an analogous term, as well as being notable and prominent. This is to ensure excessively minor team-ups aren't indexed, and thus bloat the wiki.

• Instead, consider mentioning characters with no reliable feats on the team's page as regular members.
• Additionally, for teams with unindexable minority members, their roles can be explained in the Teamwork section or through relevant stats

 

[The_Impress]

Reading through the thread, I suppose, everyone agreed with DT, so I will try to create simple concise note(s):

This is the current note in the page:

I will expand it like this:

This already exists in the standard format, Dread :v

• In the scenario a few members of the team are inapplicable to receive a file due to being too mundane, the team profile can still be made with the file accounting their statistics and mechanics with respect to the entire team in the profile itself.
• In the scenario there are numerous minor or unremarkable members of the team, it can be considered functionally akin to a civilization, as such Civilization Profiles format may be better suited to index them.

It's redundant

 

[ImmortalDread]

Actually, after @The_Impress told me off-site, this thread should be closed. The rules already exists:

In the scenario a few members of the team are inapplicable to receive a file due to being too mundane, the team profile can still be made with the file accounting their statistics and mechanics with respect to the entire team in the profile itself.

In the scenario there are numerous minor or unremarkable members of the team, it can be considered functionally akin to a civilization, as such Civilization Profiles format may be better suited to index them.

Any thread moderator or administrator can close this thread. The rule already exists, and thanks for helping out.

Edit: I got ninja'ed. Either way, thank you, @The_Impress for pointing this out, I did not notice this. I thought the rule does not exist (noted by Bambu and DT), so I go by word-of-mouth without verifying it. My mistake.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

The only change that may be needed is changing it to note that a civilization page is not needed for numerous unnamed individuals. If this is an avenue someone wants to discuss, feel free to reopen this.

 

[Antvasima]

The only change that may be needed is changing it to note that a civilization page is not needed for numerous unnamed individuals. If this is an avenue someone wants to discuss, feel free to reopen this.

Where should that text be added in that case? If it is quickly handled, I do not see the harm in handling it before we close this thread.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

We currently have a sentence referencing the subject, it would be a small task to restate it in the same line to clarify concretely that a civilization page is not needed.

In the scenario there are numerous minor or unremarkable members of the team, it can be considered functionally akin to a civilization, as such Civilization Profiles format may be better suited to index them.

We would essentially change this bit to say something like

• In the scenario there are numerous minor or unremarkable members of the team, they may be listed alongside other members of the team, either by their name or designation (e.g., bodyguard, knight, soldier, etc)

Basically just clarify that we don't need to make them a civ page and instead note that team pages specifically can include broader organizations consisting of many unnamed members.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That change seems fine to me at least.

What do the rest of you think?

 

[ImmortalDread]

It is fine, I suppose.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the reply.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I suppose it is minor, can we apply the changes? Altho the page in question is locked.

 

[Antvasima]

I suppose it is minor, can we apply the changes? Altho the page in question is locked.

I think so, yes.

@Mr._Bambu @Just_a_Random_Butler

Are you willing to help out please?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Done so. I'll close this.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you to everybody who helped out here.