Editing Pikipedia talk:Collectible article guidelines

I feel like this should be changed to "Collectible article policy" or something like that, because fruits aren't the only major collectibles: we've got ship parts in Pikmin and treasures in Pikmin 2. Ship part, treasure, and fruit articles can all follow the same general layout. {{User:PikFan23/sig}} 04:07, 6 March 2016 (EST)
:I'm starting to think that this was initially written as a collectible article policy, and then my mind slipped and made it fruit-only. I'll update it. &mdash; '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 07:58, 8 March 2016 (EST)

== Real world images ==
[[User:Results May Vary|Results May Vary]]'s recent changes pointed out how some real world images of treasures are pointless, since users can just check Wikipedia for them. I agree, but only partially. Maybe we should make it a guideline that if a subject has images that are hard to find, or only very specific real world variations exist, then we should have an image on the Pikipedia article, ''if it is under a good license''. Otherwise, if it's something anybody knows of, and can instantly find in the equivalent Wikipedia article, like a watermelon, it shouldn't be included in the article. I think we should have some way of linking to an external image in this case though, for convenience's sake. Thoughts? &mdash; '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 11:15, 5 October 2018 (EDT)
:If a real-world image aids in understanding the item, it should be included in the article; not everyone is going to search another site for an image. They should be open-licensed though, which many aren't at the moment. &mdash; [[User:Botanist|'''Botanist''']]<sub>[[User talk:Botanist|''(talk)'']]</sub> 02:49, June 24, 2021 (EDT)

== "Actually" ==
Articles on treasures and fruits say what real-world item the treasure or fruit is based on, and the way this is done varies. Most articles use "actually", for example "The [[Dual Wheeler]] is actually a pair of glasses", while some don't, for example "The [[Tear Stone]] is a tear-shaped sapphire gem". I think this use of "actually" is unnecessary and makes the sentence sound very unprofessional, but it's also very prevalent through treasure articles. Is it worth having guidelines on how to say what real-world item a treasure or fruit is, or should it be allowed to vary by article? &mdash; [[User:Botanist|'''Botanist''']]<sub>[[User talk:Botanist|''(talk)'']]</sub> 02:49, June 24, 2021 (EDT)
:I think it should be standardized, but it's not important enough to warrant a guideline. I vote for the word being removed. &mdash; '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 15:53, June 26, 2021 (EDT)
::So I guess what should be done is "if you're editing a treasure article, remove it, but otherwise don't worry about it"? &mdash; [[User:Botanist|'''Botanist''']]<sub>[[User talk:Botanist|''(talk)'']]</sub> 18:19, June 26, 2021 (EDT)
:::Yep, sounds good. &mdash; '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 11:32, June 27, 2021 (EDT)