Forum:Should retired items be split from current?: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| Indent = :::: | | Indent = :::: | ||
| Text = I think that would work well. The multiitem pages have been awkward to construct in a consistent manner. I'll make a crosslink template for tying related pages together. --{{User:Tlosk/Sig}} 20:13, January 2, 2010 (UTC) | | Text = I think that would work well. The multiitem pages have been awkward to construct in a consistent manner. I'll make a crosslink template for tying related pages together. --{{User:Tlosk/Sig}} 20:13, January 2, 2010 (UTC) | ||
}} | |||
{{Post | |||
| Indent = ::::: | |||
| Text = Maybe just link to the old/new version in the notes? | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 20:26, 2 January 2010
Was just looking through the Category:Retired, and noticed a lot of stuff you can still obtain in there, maybe it would be less confusing to people if they were split. --Immortalbob 18:34, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, can't the items that have new icons, stats and/or artwork have a 'older version' category or something maybe? --Tiger1986 18:51, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
I was thinking that they should be moved to Item Name (Retired) --Immortalbob 19:29, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
Maybe just link to the old/new version in the notes?