Talk:Shaidan Basin

This article is within the scope of the Unfinished Book WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve BattleTechWiki through the data-mining of official BattleTech publications. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Geological features

Shouldn't this be a sub-section of the planetary description of Luthien instead of having its own article? Frabby 14:55, 14 March 2012 (PDT)

Yeah, you may be right. Let me ponder.--Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 15:05, 14 March 2012 (PDT)

Okay, the number one reason I don't like it on the planet's page is clutter. The Planetary team is working hard to develop consistency between planet articles and this just adds clutter on a few important but limited (in number) articles.

Instead, I propose a child article (not sub-page). In this case, Geography of Luthien, which is offered as a link on the Luthien article. This page would be limited to natural items, nothing man-made. It would be presented in dictionary form divided by categorical sections and I'm thinking of re-directs provided to each entry. The parent planet page would still have a location section that lists the names of man-made structures categorized on that list by continents and islands (and oceans, where applicable). These man-made items would be linked to their parent articles (I do feel strongly that man-made items of reasonable size should have their own articles: drop-ports, cities, complexes, etc.). I'll clean up the Luthien article's current location list shortly, to demonstrate. Comments? --Revanche ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:49, 14 March 2012 (PDT)

I find myself totally opposed to your reasoning. A clean, standardized "planet" article (please tell me you mean planet section in the System article!) is not, imho, a valid reason unto itself to exclude pertinent data from said article. As a user, I'd positively expect any and all information originally pertaining to Luthien to be right there in the Luthien article, not spread out over numerous articles. I think my rationale is the same here as for my opposition to the regimental articles for coherent brigades: It's just pointless to artificially divide up a topic into smaller chunks for the sake of having individual articles where it should have sections instead. I dislike the concept of sub-articles on principle - they are not worth having because they are not even a proper articles themselves.

And do those sub-articles not amount to cluttering BTW as well? ;) Frabby 04:17, 15 March 2012 (PDT)