Difference between revisions of "Talk:Articles"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Clarification) |
(Finished moving links. Request for comments.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==LoS, Fov== | ==LoS, Fov== | ||
I am moving references to all FoV/LoS articles to those two pages (and ray casting/shadow casting/permissive fov pages). It is impossible to tell by looking at the titles of the articles what method is described and why you might want to use that method rather than another. This will be explained in the appropriate pages with links to the articles. [[User:Duerig|Duerig]] 04:47, 27 Apr 2007 (CEST) | I am moving references to all FoV/LoS articles to those two pages (and ray casting/shadow casting/permissive fov pages). It is impossible to tell by looking at the titles of the articles what method is described and why you might want to use that method rather than another. This will be explained in the appropriate pages with links to the articles. [[User:Duerig|Duerig]] 04:47, 27 Apr 2007 (CEST) | ||
:They are now moved. I think this provides a cleaner and more useful interface for somebody trying to figure out how they want to deal with LoS/FoV. However, it not doesn't quite conform to the rest of the page. If the current state is objectionable, I can put the links back and perhaps use sub-headings to classify them here in addition to describing them on the respective pages. [[User:Duerig|Duerig]] 06:45, 27 Apr 2007 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 04:45, 27 April 2007
LoS, Fov
I am moving references to all FoV/LoS articles to those two pages (and ray casting/shadow casting/permissive fov pages). It is impossible to tell by looking at the titles of the articles what method is described and why you might want to use that method rather than another. This will be explained in the appropriate pages with links to the articles. Duerig 04:47, 27 Apr 2007 (CEST)
- They are now moved. I think this provides a cleaner and more useful interface for somebody trying to figure out how they want to deal with LoS/FoV. However, it not doesn't quite conform to the rest of the page. If the current state is objectionable, I can put the links back and perhaps use sub-headings to classify them here in addition to describing them on the respective pages. Duerig 06:45, 27 Apr 2007 (CEST)