I just saw you revert of my previous edit, generally we should reach consensus first, but looking at you extra changes I don't feel it would be fit to leave in the unedited state as you replaced the article with that of the soda fountain.
Also without the additional text, I don't think the titling format needs changing, do we really need a subtitle for each variant when it is only a coulpe of lines per item? Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 02:18, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
- This is what I was trying to do. I'm linking to each of the variants of soda fountain and phoropter to point out the options that cause the settler to leave your vault. This requires sections on both of the two latter pages with the exact same structure as Power Cycle 1000 so that all the links work. By removing sections, the links break. I just saved the page anyway even though the section links don't work. Is this a good format to export to soda fountain and phoropter? –PatPeter 02:31, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't come back to you yet on this. I've been looking at phoropter and trying to decide how to best make it fit in. The information is good, but should be in characteristics really. That said it makes more sense having it in the style you have done it too. I need to work out how to make it fit both criteria. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 09:17, November 13, 2017 (UTC)
- I was trying to copy back the formatting on phoropter from a previous version and I accidentally copied the soda fountain text that I was in the process of editing. I've finished editing both of the pages to what I intended. –PatPeter 02:56, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
Formating consensus Edit
Please wait with adding your desired content to the pages until consensus has been reached. Simply leaving a reply does not constitute a consensus, even if the other doesn't reply for some time.
- FDekker talk 02:59, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
- It wasn't an issue of formatting but rather content that sparked this original issue. Namely, a link to Vision of the Future instead of describing what the effects of each option are. –PatPeter 03:22, November 12, 2017 (UTC)
Delayed response Edit
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you over Power Cycle 1000, Phoropter and Soda fountain. I've had a look and admittedly your layout is readable and gives the information. However, looking at it against the guideline, this is blending characteristics with crafting (which would also be a subsection within characteristics). Additionally there is information that is replicated several times, when really it should only be mentioned once in the article.
I'm currently working on sandbox versions, using your information to get the layout consistent with other articles. Once that is done, I will show you the proposed versions. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 21:16, December 6, 2017 (UTC)
- I have two example pages to show you: Phoropter and Power Cycle 1000. Unless there is any major issues with this format, I will transfer the articles over in a week's time. Minor issues will need to be worked out after transfer, as I said before currently the articles don't meet article layout standards. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 20:12, December 25, 2017 (UTC)
- Would moving the Notes section into the bottom of Characteristics be in line with the style guide? I worry that the Notes won't be seen and others will fall prey to losing a settler. –PatPeter 23:45, December 27, 2017 (UTC)
I've taken a look at that with one of our content moderators and we agree it isn't characteristic information, more quest related information. TYhat made us wonder if it should be on the settlement objects articles at all. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 13:37, December 28, 2017 (UTC)