Difference between revisions of "PinataIsland.info talk:Style guide"
FeralKitty (talk | contribs) (Change wording for Trick requirement uses?) |
(→Change wording for Trick requirement uses?) |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
It's less ambiguous than current wording, and reuse of consistent wording would probably help cut back on having to edit future contributions. --[[User:FeralKitty|FeralKitty]] ([[User_talk:FeralKitty|talk]]) 15:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | It's less ambiguous than current wording, and reuse of consistent wording would probably help cut back on having to edit future contributions. --[[User:FeralKitty|FeralKitty]] ([[User_talk:FeralKitty|talk]]) 15:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Agreed. In fact I may have unknowingly done this on a couple of the species and plant articles. Not many though as I had been forgetting to check if the plants were trick triggers as I went through the first time. Your proposed wording sounds better and is smoother to read, even if it is directed and not automated. --[[User:ImaTestWentBad|ImaTestWentBad]] 21:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 13:47, 6 August 2009
Contents
Oops
I realized as I was describing that tools are lowercase, that all the new tool names have "bit" me. For example, the plant articles should have said "use your seed pouch," not "use your Seed Pouch." --FeralKitty (talk) 02:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Flowerhead
Traditionally, we've omitted this, and just said "Eat a daisy" instead of "Eat a daisy flowerhead" or "Eat a daisy flowerhead". (Case conventions for plant names are lowercase.)
Do we want to stick with the old convention, or adopt using flowerhead? --FeralKitty (talk) 14:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Unless pinatas are now able to eat entire flowers, I would say stick with the shorter form version... –xenocidic (talk) 15:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Just for Fun wildcard versions heading
Should we go with a (capitalization and plurals corrected) "There are no wildcard versions in Just for Fun mode, because you can't play the romancing mini-game," or completely omit the heading/text as has been the convention when the heading isn't applicable. --FeralKitty (talk) 20:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's best to mention that there is no wildcards, similar to how I've mentioned that there is no Paper Pets in PP, for example. –xenocidic (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- That's not really the same thing. Obviously, we can't omit that shop's Pocket Paradise tab and expect people to know to look at Gretchen's shop.
- If we left every heading in that didn't apply, and said it didn't apply, I think the articles would get tedious to read. If we want to say there are no wildcards in Just for Fun, that probably belongs on the wildcard article, itself. --FeralKitty (talk) 20:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Change wording for Trick requirement uses?
The fact that we describe some uses as "eating" and others as "feeding" may lead to some confusion when members contribute uses. We already describe Romance requirements as "eating" even though it's a directed action. To simplify how uses are described, why don't we just word tricks in the same manner as other requirements?
- Eating 1 Whirlm helps meet the Sparrowmint Romance requirements.
- Feeding a Whirlm to a Roario helps meet its Trick requirements. (current)
- Eating 1 Whirlm helps meet the Roario Trick requirements. (proposed)
It's less ambiguous than current wording, and reuse of consistent wording would probably help cut back on having to edit future contributions. --FeralKitty (talk) 15:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. In fact I may have unknowingly done this on a couple of the species and plant articles. Not many though as I had been forgetting to check if the plants were trick triggers as I went through the first time. Your proposed wording sounds better and is smoother to read, even if it is directed and not automated. --ImaTestWentBad 21:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
