Difference between revisions of "Talk:Liberty Republic"

From Discovery Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 28: Line 28:
  
 
==Ships listed==
 
==Ships listed==
Tazuras's ideas haven't turned up yet in the wiki talk page so I'll just make mine here. This is copied to teh Talk page.
+
Copied from the forums.
 +
http://discoverygc.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43002&st=0&gopid=662954&#entry662954
  
The Idea I have for this kind of thing was to link people to put Liberty ships into the [url=http://discoveryfl.com/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Liberty][Category: Liberty][/url] page.  
+
The Idea I have for this kind of thing was to link people to put Liberty ships into the [http://discoveryfl.com/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Liberty] page.  
  
 
The problem we face is that there are MANY Liberty ships. Lawful and unlawful. Are we going to include the unlawful ships on the Liberty list as well?
 
The problem we face is that there are MANY Liberty ships. Lawful and unlawful. Are we going to include the unlawful ships on the Liberty list as well?
  
Another problem is people perceptions of what they can use. Can LSF use LN ships? Can regular LN use top secret LSF ships? Can pirates use lawful ships and vice versa? Common sense says now, but if you list them on there, since they ARE liberty ships, then people will assume they can. Might not be as big a deal as I make it, but the wiki needs to be clear in it's information representation.  
+
Another problem is people perceptions of what they can use. Can LSF use LN ships? Can regular LN use top secret LSF ships? Can pirates use lawful ships and vice versa? Common sense says no, but if you list them on there, since they ARE liberty ships, then people will assume they can. Might not be as big a deal as I make it, but the wiki needs to be clear in it's information representation.  
  
 
While I appreciate what you're trying to do, it needs further "kneeding". <br>[[User:Chovynz| ~Chovynz~ ]] <sup>([[User_talk:Chovynz|Blabs]] • [[Special:Contributions/Chovynz|Ego]]) </sup> 16:48, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
 
While I appreciate what you're trying to do, it needs further "kneeding". <br>[[User:Chovynz| ~Chovynz~ ]] <sup>([[User_talk:Chovynz|Blabs]] • [[Special:Contributions/Chovynz|Ego]]) </sup> 16:48, 22 July 2009 (MDT)

Revision as of 22:49, 22 July 2009

Is there anyone good at formatting? I think we should most certainly establish a format for the House pages, maybe something like this:

Overview
Lawful Forces
Corporations
Quasi-lawful entities
Unlawful Entities
Government structure
-subsection: link to laws
Player Factions

Suggestions?

Sovereign 05:05, 27 May 2008 (GMT)


Is Coronado considered Liberty? Its a way into Liberty, but it only links through Cortez, and is named accordingly for independent worlds. I'm going to pull it off the list, if you think otherwise we can discuss this and figure it out.

Also, is Puerto Rico, the Junker Guard system, considered part of Liberty?

Sovereign 20:12, 27 May 2008 (GMT)

As for Puerto Rico, I am pretty sure it does not belong to Liberty. A guard system is owned by the residing faction - and the Junkers are not (only) Liberty citizen.

As for Coronado, I thought it'd be belong to Liberty (due to the name), hence my edit. I'm not sure about it though. Best would be to get Igiss' knowledge on that part

--Sleipnir 15:18, 28 May 2008 (GMT)

Ships listed

Copied from the forums. http://discoverygc.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=43002&st=0&gopid=662954&#entry662954

The Idea I have for this kind of thing was to link people to put Liberty ships into the [1] page.

The problem we face is that there are MANY Liberty ships. Lawful and unlawful. Are we going to include the unlawful ships on the Liberty list as well?

Another problem is people perceptions of what they can use. Can LSF use LN ships? Can regular LN use top secret LSF ships? Can pirates use lawful ships and vice versa? Common sense says no, but if you list them on there, since they ARE liberty ships, then people will assume they can. Might not be as big a deal as I make it, but the wiki needs to be clear in it's information representation.

While I appreciate what you're trying to do, it needs further "kneeding".
~Chovynz~ (BlabsEgo) 16:48, 22 July 2009 (MDT)