Forum:Part CA slump

Forums: Index →

→ Part CA slump

Recently, I've noticed a lot of Part articles being made Complete just because they have a complete list of appearances. Surely a part should have a desciption (possibly of printing) before being made complete? Otherwise it is just an infobox, a short sentence and a list to be made complete!

What do you think? - nxt 17:46, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

The article should have in order to be a CA is all of the below (unless there is no External Link:
- All infoboxes filled to it's limit. (:S)
- A Description.
- An appearances section.
- An external links section

^ Skdhjf^(Talk!) 17:50, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

That's not in the MoS. - nxt 18:21, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Of course it's not. It's called the Tatooine Manual of Style.:P But the MoS does point out that a Part article is made up of that list I just gave - meaning if it has all that stuff on that list (Also seen n the MoS) it must be a CA. Skdhjf^(Talk!) 19:11, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Do keep in mind that "complete" means very different things depending on the type of article. A list page and a part page should not be compared to the same standard. a jr 20:12, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
Support per all above. FB100Z • talk • contribs 23:28, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
There is an ongoing talk about getting a decent MoS for part articles, which can be found here. Also, I'm still not even sure if half of these pages should exist since we agreed to do only design ID's, a lot of them look like element ID's, or some other form of ID commonly found on Peeron for Design ID's with specific printing. NightblazeSaber 23:47, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
- That forum I started has been forgotten about for over a month, really this discussion should be taking place there.

SKP4472 Talk [[Special:Editcount/SKP4472|Special:Editcount/SKP4472 Edits!]] Devoted Editor of Brickipedia 19:57, June 13, 2011 (UTC)