Talk:Classes - Revision history

Spooky: Add used discussion-page tracking category

2026-04-28T16:01:29Z

Add used discussion-page tracking category

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:01, 28 April 2026
Line 20:		Line 20:

	<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->		<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->
			[[Category:Discussions]]

Spooky: Add table of contents to discussion pages

2026-04-28T05:55:50Z

Add table of contents to discussion pages

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:55, 28 April 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	}}		}}
	<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->		<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->

			__TOC__

	<!-- URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->		<!-- URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->
Line 14:		Line 16:
	:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 14:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)		:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 14:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
	::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 16:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)		::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 16:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


	Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 06:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)		Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 06:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

	<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->		<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->

Spooky: Clean legacy archive discussion formatting

2026-04-28T04:52:47Z

Clean legacy archive discussion formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:52, 28 April 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Consolidated discussion notice		{{Consolidated discussion notice
	\|sources=		\|sources=
	* [[Talk:Classes/Archive 1]]		* [{{fullurl:Talk:Classes/Archive 1\|redirect=no}} Talk:Classes/Archive 1]
	}}		}}
	<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->		<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->

	~~== Archived discussion from [[Talk:Classes/Archive 1\|Archive 1]] ==~~

	<!-- URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->		<!-- URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->
Line 12:		Line 10:
	<!-- Recovered from restored XML revision 7317 (2015-06-25T12:36:48Z). -->		<!-- Recovered from restored XML revision 7317 (2015-06-25T12:36:48Z). -->

	~~{{Archive for converted wikitext talk page\|from~~=~~Talk:Classes\|date~~=~~2015-06-25}}~~		== General discussion ==

	Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 13:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)		Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 13:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
	:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 14:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)		:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 14:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Spooky: Normalize legacy talk signatures for DiscussionTools

2026-04-28T03:40:47Z

Normalize legacy talk signatures for DiscussionTools

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:40, 28 April 2026
Line 14:		Line 14:
	{{Archive for converted wikitext talk page\|from=Talk:Classes\|date=2015-06-25}}		{{Archive for converted wikitext talk page\|from=Talk:Classes\|date=2015-06-25}}

	Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 09:53, 5 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 13:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
	:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 10:09, 5 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 14:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
	::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 12:48, 5 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 16:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


	Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 02:05, 17 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 06:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

	<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->		<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->

Spooky: Recover restored legacy discussion archive content from XML history

2026-04-28T00:30:26Z

Recover restored legacy discussion archive content from XML history

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 28 April 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	}}		}}
	<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->		<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->

			== Archived discussion from [[Talk:Classes/Archive 1\|Archive 1]] ==

			<!-- URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->

			<!-- Recovered from restored XML revision 7317 (2015-06-25T12:36:48Z). -->

			{{Archive for converted wikitext talk page\|from=Talk:Classes\|date=2015-06-25}}

			Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 09:53, 5 June 2015 (EDT)
			:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 10:09, 5 June 2015 (EDT)
			::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 12:48, 5 June 2015 (EDT)


			Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 02:05, 17 June 2015 (EDT)

			<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->

Spooky: Consolidate or redirect 1 legacy discussion archive page

2026-04-28T00:12:08Z

Consolidate or redirect 1 legacy discussion archive page

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:12, 28 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[]		<!-- URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->
			{{Consolidated discussion notice
			\|sources=
			* [[Talk:Classes/Archive 1]]
			}}
			<!-- /URWIKI_DISCUSSION_CONSOLIDATION_NOTICE -->

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:40, 28 April 2026
Line 14:		Line 14:
	{{Archive for converted wikitext talk page\|from=Talk:Classes\|date=2015-06-25}}		{{Archive for converted wikitext talk page\|from=Talk:Classes\|date=2015-06-25}}

	Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 09:53, 5 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		Should we keep using tables for this page or would it be better to use a template? --[[User:Razorhead\|Razorhead]] ([[User talk:Razorhead\|talk]]) 13:53, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
	:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 10:09, 5 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		:I don't like the format of this page in general. It will get really clustered with that character information. Might be better to put those tables on the specific class pages. Template is not necessary I suppose. But we need some generic table style in the css. But I don't have a good eye for color so I don't want to request that. [[User:Skydivizer\|Skydivizer]] ([[User talk:Skydivizer\|talk]]) 14:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
	::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 12:48, 5 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		::I personally don't think the tables look very good right now. They should be used when conveying large amounts of information about many things, like the cards, but I don't think we need tables just to say the characters and what campaigns they're from. I think the previous format of text worked just fine for that purpose. I also think templates should be left for characters, mobs, and locations as they work well there. --[[User:Petertwnsnd\|Petertwnsnd]] ([[User talk:Petertwnsnd\|talk]]) 16:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


	Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 02:05, 17 June 2015 (~~EDT~~)		Until it has cards, it shouldn't be listed as a class imo, even more so when it's just an NPC "class". How do you tell the difference on what's used a Title and what's a class then? Seer is a bit weird since Deadbones "created" it, but I would keep that information on Blinkys character page that he was a class built up of other classes. I'll avoid using Seer for the near future. [[User:Rob\|Rob]] ([[User talk:Rob\|talk]]) 06:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

	<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->		<!-- /URWIKI_CONSOLIDATED_SOURCE: Talk:Classes/Archive 1 -->