Forum:Should retired items be split from current?: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Post | {{Post | ||
| Indent = : | | Indent = :: | ||
| Text = Yeah, can't the items that have new icons, stats and/or artwork have a 'older version' category or something maybe? | | Text = Yeah, can't the items that have new icons, stats and/or artwork have a 'older version' category or something maybe? --[[User:Tiger1986|Tiger1986]] 18:51, January 2, 2010 (UTC) | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Post | {{Post | ||
| Indent = :: | | Indent = ::: | ||
| Text = I was thinking that they should be moved to [[Item Name(Retired)]] --[[User:Immortalbob|Immortalbob]] 19:29, January 2, 2010 (UTC)}} | | Text = I was thinking that they should be moved to [[Item Name (Retired)]] --[[User:Immortalbob|Immortalbob]] 19:29, January 2, 2010 (UTC) | ||
}} | |||
{{Post | |||
| 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) | |||
}} | |||
Revision as of 20:13, 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)