Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Reviewed"
(Created page with "~~~~ A question. A while back, I was doing a bunch of routine edits of the form "X is an amateur-tiersage study in the field of Y", and there may...") |
Tao alexis (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Speaking of the reviewed category: every link on this page is now purple for me. Some of those I might have visited a while back, before you gave them the review treatment, but I'm certainly close to done with a first pass on everything so far. | Speaking of the reviewed category: every link on this page is now purple for me. Some of those I might have visited a while back, before you gave them the review treatment, but I'm certainly close to done with a first pass on everything so far. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[User:Tao alexis|Tao alexis]] ([[User talk:Tao alexis|talk]]) 19:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC) Yesterday I found 11 sage abilities that I'd failed to include in the "category: sage abilities" at the end. I miss things. Everyone does. | ||
| + | I see that you're fixing spelling errors, but are you making sure that everything that ought to have a link does? At random I picked a file, "grey ooze," from the reviewed list. Under advantages it reads, "the defender's shield is eaten ..." There are three mentions of "shield" on the page. Is there a link to "shield (weapon)" here? No. Took me what, 15 seconds to find a missing link. I see that the word "weapon" also appears twice and yet there should be a link, "Weapons List" and there isn't. You can't be serious that those two hundred pages don't have problems. | ||
Revision as of 19:55, 29 October 2023
Maxwell (talk) 19:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC) A question. A while back, I was doing a bunch of routine edits of the form "X is an amateur-tiersage study in the field of Y", and there may yet be abilities here and there which got missed for that treatment. Is it okay to fix those when I spot them, or should I refrain even from that in favor of hitting reviewed pages?
Speaking of the reviewed category: every link on this page is now purple for me. Some of those I might have visited a while back, before you gave them the review treatment, but I'm certainly close to done with a first pass on everything so far.
Tao alexis (talk) 19:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC) Yesterday I found 11 sage abilities that I'd failed to include in the "category: sage abilities" at the end. I miss things. Everyone does.
I see that you're fixing spelling errors, but are you making sure that everything that ought to have a link does? At random I picked a file, "grey ooze," from the reviewed list. Under advantages it reads, "the defender's shield is eaten ..." There are three mentions of "shield" on the page. Is there a link to "shield (weapon)" here? No. Took me what, 15 seconds to find a missing link. I see that the word "weapon" also appears twice and yet there should be a link, "Weapons List" and there isn't. You can't be serious that those two hundred pages don't have problems.
