Talk:Rules
I'll put my rationale here, since I like this one. If you look at any wikipedia page, you'll notice that the "about" or "introduction" section goes after the initial heading (which is autogenerated based on the page title), and not in its own little section. This serves several purposes:
- Introduction comes before Table of Contents
- No extra sections = shorter TOC, shorter overall page
- no duplicated headings (we had several things where it was the overall page header, then the same title again right after)
That's my rationale. I would have discussed it with you, but you weren't around. So stop reverting until we get somebody else around here. --Roguelazer
PS: I forgot to chastise you for reverting edits that actually had substance (this one) along with your rolling back of my "appearance" edits. --Roguelazer 20:32, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
Sorry if I stepped on your toes, but on most of them, not all, you were seriously messing up the look of the page, the TOC's were falling under the text, and did not look right. In a book the intro may look better before the TOC but not on these wiki pages. If I accidently removed some spelling or other estetic changes sorry, perhaps you can copy them back in.--Mark McDoogle 20:36, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
TOC's are supposed to go under the introductory text. Look at any wikipedia page that has a TOC. Examples:
The idea is that you can read what the page is about quickly and easily without having to scroll through a (potentially long) table of contents, or click a hide button. --Roguelazer 20:47, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
and theirs looks as ugly as your making VO's wiki look. Not every one of the ones you changed was actually introductory text. If you would like to MAKE some introductory text that would be great. But lets make this look good not ugly simply because others choose to have ugly pages. --Mark McDoogle 20:48, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
Examples of pages that I changed that were introductory text:
- CtC - also, duplicated header
- Guilds - where it was, the text had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with its headline. It works better as introductory text
- All of the bots pages
- Rules
- Factions (not even you can dispute this one)
I'll give you that Roleplaying and Dueling might be okay as-is. Might be.--Roguelazer 20:52, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
Now I have to go to school tomorrow, so good night. Don't do anything rude whilst I sleep. --Roguelazer 20:53, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
Act civil and argue politely. Continue to be rude and you will be banned. --Lemming 21:42, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
Ban me then Lem, I'm done! >:|
--Mark McDoogle 23:53, 26 Jun 2005 (CST)
It's always something little that gets turned into something big. If people don't agree with your changes you can talk with them and explain why you don't like it, or you can have a nice little editing war which increases the archive's size. I don't really mind things like this happening, but I do prefer that people act in a way that will yield results without too many issues. Aesthetic issues is not a good change to fight over, it's better to talk about it and get other people's opinion. Also, I'm not saying either one of you is at fault more than the other. --Lemming 05:33, 27 Jun 2005 (CST)
Well your the one that deleted my response saying that I didn't care if he changed it all to hell or not, your the one that is prolonging the argument. Next time just stay out of it. If you felt the need to edit what I wrote, why not delete the part you found offensive instread of the entire responce, 'GOT IT Lemming?!'
--Mark McDoogle 08:34, 27 Jun 2005 (CST)
Ooh, testy. --Roguelazer 10:14, 27 Jun 2005 (CST)
BOTH of you (mark and rogue) just shut up, make up, and come to some sort of civil agreement. Rogue, next time you want to make a major wiki-wide change, wait and talk to people before you do it. I don't CARE how long you have to wait, just wait. It saves others headaches, and both of you the trouble of bitching at each other because you don't like what the other is doing. Mark, get over it. I'm half tempted to roll back all of those pages to before this entire thing started - that includes the edits of both of you. If the two of you are as wise as you sometimes appear to be, you won't test me on this - I'm through with the bickering on both sides, and am serious about it ending. --Miharu 17:19, 27 Jun 2005 (CST)
