Talk:Sansha's Nation

From sdeevelopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

plz add Category:Sansha's Nation thx PV/JR.

No, the category on this page should only be "Pirate Factions" - that way we maintain the inheritance tree. Any subpages from this one, however - if we ever decide to create them - will be categorized under "Sansha's Nation" (so long as they don't belong to other categories, like Nonempire NPCs).--CCP Abraxas 12:35, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh okay. Now I get it, sorry my fault... ehm maybe than it would be good to add all subcategorys to this category, like:

You or I can than rework the Upper-line to :

NPC Factions > Pirate Factions > Serpentis > Serpentis NPC Corporations

NPC Factions > Pirate Factions > Serpentis > Serpentis NPC Corporations

what CCP likes.
Ehm Another thing... Maybe It would than be better to take out this pages:

from the Category Pirate Factions. --PV7JR 22:04, 23 January 2012 (CET)

Good points, even though some of them I'll still have to disagree with :-)

1) We'll definitely add pirate subcategories, but as you can see when browsing the pirate faction pages, there aren't any subcategory pages yet. The pirate-specific tags will only be needed when we start fleshing out the pirate pages and add subpages to them; it's those subpages that'll get the pirate category tags, not the main pirate pages themselves.

As an example of how this is going to work, look at the empire faction pages. Each one (Amarr, Caldari, Gallente, Minmatar) is not tagged with a specific empire tag (Category:Amarr, Category:Caldari, etc), but only with the Category:Empire Factions tag. Remember that a category tags means "this page belongs to", not "this page is"; so the primary Amarr Empire page "belongs to" Category:Empire Factions, but it doesn't "belong to" Category:Amarr Empire; it is that category. It's only once you get into subpages like Holders that that you can start using the empire subcategories, because Holders "belongs to" Category:Amarr Empire.

Likewise, the page on the Blood Raiders "belongs to" pirate factions, so it has the tag Category:Pirate Factions. But it doesn't "belong to" the Blood Raiders. Only its eventual subpages (like, I dunno ... pages on specific aspects of their blood rituals?) will contain the tag Category:Blood Raiders. And until we create those subpages, there is no point in creating the tags. Make sense?

2) As for the upper line, we're not going to rework it into an x > y > z format. The reason for this is simple: We don't want people using the category pages for navigation. They're a horrible way to present the data, seeing as how it's all just in alphabetized lists that can't be reordered or commented on. (The reason we use them is for internal organization.) We always, at all times, want to have people use the Portal itself to navigate. That's why we include a "See Also" listing on every page; so that you can get back to the category you were in, or continue browsing.

3) I don't understand - why would we remove the Pirate Factions tags from the pages you listed? Keep in mind that since we use the Portal for navigation, and not the x > y > z listing in the categories, we don't have to worry about the tags pointing to all kinds of different categories.--CCP Abraxas 13:38, 4 February 2012 (GMT)

I take everything back^^ and say to opposite^^... Now I get it, thx for the explaination. --Publius Valerius 16:47, 28 April 2012 (GMT)