Difference between revisions of "Talk:1st McCarron's Armored Cavalry"
Sarna News
(It's not about regiments, it's about notability) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
::: The MAC is no longer a mercenary unit. It has become a CC house unit. --[[User:Neufeld|Neufeld]] 14:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC) | ::: The MAC is no longer a mercenary unit. It has become a CC house unit. --[[User:Neufeld|Neufeld]] 14:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
::::We don't need a separate page for every ''regiment''; we need a page for every ''unit'' (no matter if lance or brigade). What is the point of breaking up the MAC article into six others when all the information can (and should!) be found in one concise article? In this case, the individual regiment articles are even almost empty. It may be worthwile to consider detailed individual articles for units where there is actually something to say about them - the [[Black Widow Company]] does warrant a separate article from [[Wolf's Dragoons]], and the 10th Lyran Guard is probably also sufficiently high-profile. But John Doe's Regiment of the 1234th Marik Militia most certainly is not. Nor is the Crater Cobras' 2nd Regiment. Or, case in point, the individual MAC regiments. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC) | ::::We don't need a separate page for every ''regiment''; we need a page for every ''unit'' (no matter if lance or brigade). What is the point of breaking up the MAC article into six others when all the information can (and should!) be found in one concise article? In this case, the individual regiment articles are even almost empty. It may be worthwile to consider detailed individual articles for units where there is actually something to say about them - the [[Black Widow Company]] does warrant a separate article from [[Wolf's Dragoons]], and the 10th Lyran Guard is probably also sufficiently high-profile. But John Doe's Regiment of the 1234th Marik Militia most certainly is not. Nor is the Crater Cobras' 2nd Regiment. Or, case in point, the individual MAC regiments. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] 14:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | :::::We really need [[Policy:Unit Pages]]. --[[User:Neufeld|Neufeld]] 14:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 10:23, 8 April 2010
Merging
Proposing this be merged into the main article for MAC. ClanWolverine101 03:36, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Why? Other regiments have also their own page. Would you also propose to merge 10th Lyran Guards into the Lyran Guards main article? --Neufeld 13:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- I addressed this in the main MAC talk page - It is my position that mercenary units should be the exception to the "one regiment, one article" rule. I apply the same to Wolf's Dragoons, the ELH, etc. ClanWolverine101 14:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- The MAC is no longer a mercenary unit. It has become a CC house unit. --Neufeld 14:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- We don't need a separate page for every regiment; we need a page for every unit (no matter if lance or brigade). What is the point of breaking up the MAC article into six others when all the information can (and should!) be found in one concise article? In this case, the individual regiment articles are even almost empty. It may be worthwile to consider detailed individual articles for units where there is actually something to say about them - the Black Widow Company does warrant a separate article from Wolf's Dragoons, and the 10th Lyran Guard is probably also sufficiently high-profile. But John Doe's Regiment of the 1234th Marik Militia most certainly is not. Nor is the Crater Cobras' 2nd Regiment. Or, case in point, the individual MAC regiments. Frabby 14:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- We really need Policy:Unit Pages. --Neufeld 14:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- We don't need a separate page for every regiment; we need a page for every unit (no matter if lance or brigade). What is the point of breaking up the MAC article into six others when all the information can (and should!) be found in one concise article? In this case, the individual regiment articles are even almost empty. It may be worthwile to consider detailed individual articles for units where there is actually something to say about them - the Black Widow Company does warrant a separate article from Wolf's Dragoons, and the 10th Lyran Guard is probably also sufficiently high-profile. But John Doe's Regiment of the 1234th Marik Militia most certainly is not. Nor is the Crater Cobras' 2nd Regiment. Or, case in point, the individual MAC regiments. Frabby 14:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- The MAC is no longer a mercenary unit. It has become a CC house unit. --Neufeld 14:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- I addressed this in the main MAC talk page - It is my position that mercenary units should be the exception to the "one regiment, one article" rule. I apply the same to Wolf's Dragoons, the ELH, etc. ClanWolverine101 14:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)