27 replies to this topic

[felinoel]

True this would cause a major change for the wiki... maybe we SHOULD stick to one item per article?

So what then, should we stick to the norm?

[TehRawrz]

Be aware, the small bits that come from dust are renamed to powdered in 1.7.10. (iron ore dust is now powdered iron ore).

[felinoel]

Be aware, the small bits that come from dust are renamed to powdered in 1.7.10. (iron ore dust is now powdered iron ore).

Really?

 

EDIT:

Ok updated it all

[RZR0]

This is similar to the GregTech item/material variant problem. I'm up for creating articles like "Broken Ore" that cover all variations in a general way.

I am "the more - the better" person, so I'd create a page for each ore.

Maybe a combined approach is the answer. Make a general page, also make individual pages for the items that have special uses, but only link them from the special page and not the nav?

[dgelessus]

Sure, things that have actual unique features deserve their own pages. I'd say we put these in the navbox as well so people can easily see e. g. which of GregTech's over nine thousand hammer variants have a special purpose.

[felinoel]

Maybe a combined approach is the answer. Make a general page, also make individual pages for the items that have special uses, but only link them from the special page and not the nav?

None of them have special uses though?

[RZR0]

None of them have special uses though?

I'm not just talking about ExN

[felinoel]

I'm not just talking about ExN

Ah I see it is a rule of style to use to give a reason why we merge all of the ExN articles and not others.

I can get behind that.