Forum:Should retired items be split from current?: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 18:04, 10 January 2010

Forums: Index →

→ Forum:Should retired items be split from current?

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)

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. --Tlosk talk contr 20:13, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe just link to the old/new version in the notes? --Immortalbob 20:26, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

The {{Intro}} template can now display links to multiple retired versions as well as a link to the current version.

For example Acid Axe and Acid Axe (Retired).

--Tlosk talk contr 18:04, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 }}
 {{Post
-  | Indent = :::::
+  | Indent = ::::::
   | Text = The {{tl|Intro}} template can now display links to multiple retired versions as well as a link to the current version.
-For example [[Acid Axe]] and [[Acid Axe (Retired]].
+For example [[Acid Axe]] and [[Acid Axe (Retired)]].
 --{{User:Tlosk/Sig}} 18:04, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
 }}