Talk:Field Manual: Capellan Confederation

Primary Writing[edit]

Is there really a need to differentiate who wrote what part? --Xoid 00:11, 30 October 2007 (CDT)

The TOC in the book makes the distinction, so I included it. I can't see the harm in adding the information in this instance. I did not use that info in Field Manual: Update because there so many sections that enumerating all of the them would consume too much space, but that's not a problem here. Scaletail 20:35, 30 October 2007 (CDT)
If too much space is a problem we could use one of those templates Wikipedia has to auto-hide the information; that way only people actually interested in the full accreditation would see it. I find it odd that they even had individual accreditations… while it can certainly be useful for knowing who to blame for unbalanced game mechanic y, I've rarely seen it in practice; I had assumed you done additional research on this one. >_> --Xoid 08:56, 31 October 2007 (CDT)