Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shardhammer"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voidbinder (talk | contribs) |
m (→Missing information?: reply) |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
::Surely more information will come to light with additional SA novels. I searched both books for "warhammer", "hammer" and "shardhammer" and I think I gleaned all the relevant information. A second set of eyes would be great though. It's important to note, as well, that it was never called a Shardhammer until the second book. --[[User:Voidbinder|Voidbinder]] ([[User talk:Voidbinder|talk]]) 03:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
::Surely more information will come to light with additional SA novels. I searched both books for "warhammer", "hammer" and "shardhammer" and I think I gleaned all the relevant information. A second set of eyes would be great though. It's important to note, as well, that it was never called a Shardhammer until the second book. --[[User:Voidbinder|Voidbinder]] ([[User talk:Voidbinder|talk]]) 03:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
+ | |||
+ | :Chapters with mentions of hammers: |
||
+ | :;WoK: 6, 21, 27, 28, 40, 56, 65, 66, 69 |
||
+ | :;WoR: 4, 24, 26, 29, 30, 32, 49, 51, 56, 57, 60, 67, 68, 81, 86 |
||
+ | : --[[User:Fbstj|Joe ST]] ([[User talk:Fbstj|talk]]) 11:45, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:45, 28 February 2015
Missing information?
Why does every article seem to have the "This article is missing information" comment? --Voidbinder (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- That notice appears on every page marked as a
{{stub}}
. Which is one of four article classifications (the others being{{complete}}
,{{good}}
, and{{exemplary}}
) that we admins use to keep track of quality on the Coppermind. If you believe an article to no longer be a stub please bring it to our attention and we'll look it over and update the tag.--WeiryWriter (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Is it possible that an article can be a stub and still contain all the available information on it's subject? Then would it still be appropriate to have that comment? --Voidbinder (talk) 19:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- If an article has all of the current relevant knowledge then it should get marked as
{{complete}}
.--WeiryWriter (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- It's possible, I'll try and take a look at it this weekend. We also need to come up with formalized sections for weapons and things...--WeiryWriter (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Surely more information will come to light with additional SA novels. I searched both books for "warhammer", "hammer" and "shardhammer" and I think I gleaned all the relevant information. A second set of eyes would be great though. It's important to note, as well, that it was never called a Shardhammer until the second book. --Voidbinder (talk) 03:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)