Talk:Vegetation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
::I've had the idea of a taxonomy tree too. It's still on my "to do far later" list. The problems with those article names is that they're too inclusive, and too unlikely for people to be searching for. Plus they still sound like exclusively list articles from the name alone. Good ideas, but they won't work. — '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 08:50, 30 June 2015 (EDT) | ::I've had the idea of a taxonomy tree too. It's still on my "to do far later" list. The problems with those article names is that they're too inclusive, and too unlikely for people to be searching for. Plus they still sound like exclusively list articles from the name alone. Good ideas, but they won't work. — '''{''[[User:Espyo|Espyo]]''<sup>[[User talk:Espyo|T]]</sup>}''' 08:50, 30 June 2015 (EDT) | ||
:::Well, what if we made "Plant" and "Fungus" two separate pages with references to each other (as in, See also: Fungus)? For the sake of keeping content gameplay-oriented, that would still work, since all labeled fungi in the games serve gameplay purposes. Then we could maybe have some sort of disambiguation page with "Plant", "Fungus", "Enemy" (which we could redirect to "Animal"?), and possibly a separate page about plant-animal and fungi-animal (Puffstool) hybrids. I'm sorry that's such a big suggestion, I don't mean to undermine any ideas you may have had about it. [[User:Scruffy|Scruffy]] ([[User talk:Scruffy|talk]]) 17:26, 30 June 2015 (EDT) |
Revision as of 16:26, June 30, 2015
Merge
Okay, we need to discuss what to do with this page. We have this, and we have Plants and fungi. This page is good, because it focuses not only on how plants are a part of the gameplay, but also lists them. It's bad, however, because it doesn't list fungi (or when it does, it counts them as plants, which is wrong), and it doesn't list unlabeled species. The Plants and fungi page is the exact opposite.
Content-wise, I think it makes sense for us to have a single page that explains how plants and fungi work as gameplay elements, and also detail other misc. stuff like the treasures that are inherently plants and such, and then further down, it lists all known plants with links to them when they have pages, and finally, contains simple sections detailing unnamed plants and fungi. Do we all agree on that?
The article name is the worst part, because "Plant" fits the naming scheme of other such articles, but makes no mention of fungi, which I think is a bad idea. On the flip side, "Plants and fungi" is the name you'd give to a list article, exclusively. We sure as hell can't use "Plant and fungus" for the final article, as that just sounds horribly wrong. I thought about "Flora", and figured that that'd incorporate both plants and fungi, but after some research, I learned that it's for plants only... I also tried searching through the game's strings and the manual, but this "decorative greenery" concept is not named anywhere. Heck, it's barely even acknowledged. For those of you that are reading this and don't quite understand why WE make it a concept, it's simply because plants and fungi have some importance in the games, as not only do they sometimes affect the gameplay itself (read the article for more info), but they're also acknowledged as things on the Piklopedia.
I want to hear your opinions on this. Do you agree about what the page should have, content-wise? And what do you have to say about the potential name for the article? — {EspyoT} 07:08, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
- I agree that one page is enough to describe all the plants and fungi in these games. I also like your idea of naming important gameplay plants and fungi first, and then having the list and the unnamed ones; to me that seems a lot more organized. I've been researching a name and it seems that mycology is regarded by the International Botanical Congress as an official branch of botany. So we could possibly call the page "Botanical objects" or "Botanical organisms". I know it still sort of sounds like it's excluding fungi, but the only other option I could think of was the domain "Eukaryota," which contains both the kingdoms Plantae and Fungi, but also contains Animalia. That being said, it would be neat to create a sort of "Pikmin tree of life" in which the organisms in the game are visually classified into their kingdoms and families... I know the taxonomy of the organisms is inconsistent in the games, but it's just a fleeting idea I had. Scruffy (talk) 08:05, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
- I've had the idea of a taxonomy tree too. It's still on my "to do far later" list. The problems with those article names is that they're too inclusive, and too unlikely for people to be searching for. Plus they still sound like exclusively list articles from the name alone. Good ideas, but they won't work. — {EspyoT} 08:50, 30 June 2015 (EDT)
- Well, what if we made "Plant" and "Fungus" two separate pages with references to each other (as in, See also: Fungus)? For the sake of keeping content gameplay-oriented, that would still work, since all labeled fungi in the games serve gameplay purposes. Then we could maybe have some sort of disambiguation page with "Plant", "Fungus", "Enemy" (which we could redirect to "Animal"?), and possibly a separate page about plant-animal and fungi-animal (Puffstool) hybrids. I'm sorry that's such a big suggestion, I don't mean to undermine any ideas you may have had about it. Scruffy (talk) 17:26, 30 June 2015 (EDT)