Quote:
Originally Posted by zackmann08
THANK YOU PropMaster!!! SOOOO nice to have this laid out. I really dont have a strong opinion one way or the other but I DO really care for consistency...
The only addition I would make is for pages like the AK-47 which are subdivided into multiple categories (AK-47, AKS-47, AKM, etc.). There are a ton of pages like this (M16, M1911, Beretta 92FS, etc.).
How does the following look:
=AK-47=
==Specifications==
==Film==
==Television==
=AKS-47=
==Specifications==
==Film==
==Television==
etc. etc.
Currently I have been using:
=AK-47=
==Speicifcations==
===Film===
===Television===
But I like what you are saying about using 2 "=" instead of 3. What are your thoughts on the pages for multiple guns?
SO glad to finally be getting a consensus.
|
Specifications are nice, but I never thought them to be 'categorization worthy' IF doing so screwed up the categorization of the guns. For one, look at AK-47. The Specs for the many types differ very little other than the year of introduction. the rate of fire, caliber, type of box magazine, etc. usually are the same. Also with 'after market' conversions like the AKU-94 bullpup AK, there really isn't a reason for a Specs because it changes depending on what AK is put into the aftermarket stock.
Now this is a point that I've never really discussed with others. I like having the specifications, but I just embolden the Specs title and don't let it be a category title (so that it shows up in the TOC). I don't think people will look to the TOC and care where the SPECs are as long as they are always at the beginning of each gun section (where needed).
Now here is where I would like input. How important ARE specs to the page viewer? Sure it should be there somewhere, but does it NEED a category all it's own?