Talk:Athosian

Latest comment: 16 years ago by Matthew R Dunn in topic Moved

Template for gate addresses

edit

Hey all, I made a template to make putting a gate address on a page somewhat easier. I copied this article (as of 17:50, 19 August 2005 (UTC)) to User:Andy Janata/Athos (Stargate) and edited it to use the template. If no one objects, I can convert all Pegasus gate addresses in Wikipedia to it, and make it a "normal" namespace template. Also, perhaps doing so for the Milky Way wouldn't be a bad idea. --Andy Janata 17:50, 19 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

These kind of things are being discussed in the WikiProject Stargate page. Please, make your suggestion there. Thanks. -- Andromeda 19:17, 19 August 2005 (UTC)Reply



I changed TV-Stub to stargate-stub -Shinhan 15:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Merge

edit

Why these pages need to merge -- Alfakim --  talk  14:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

  1. Other articles follow the procedure of listing known members of a race on the race page. See Jaffa, Goa'uld, Tok'ra.
  2. That's where the information is relevant, in context, accessible, and useful.
  3. Having a seperate page for a list merely generates an out-of-place and uninformative load of text that no one's ever likely to read or find in context.
  4. These lists aren't big enough issues in Stargate to warrant seperate articles for themselves.
  5. In each case, e.g. the Athosians, the Athosians are inextricably linked to the Athos article. Athosians are from Athos, Athos is the home of Athosians. The connection is absolute and exclusive, they are bound.
  6. In talking about one, you're inevitably talking about another. Why split it?
  7. Merging these pages would cut down on the number of pages in general (making things generally easier and more informative), and would bring more useful information together, also giving some depth to articles like Athos. Too many seperate lists can be pointless.

Moved

edit

Hello, I have just moved the page from Athosians, to Athosian. I did this because most pages aren't pluralised. I hope this doesn't get reverted back because I see no point in doing so. Matthew R Dunn (talk) 16:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)Reply