Category talk:Countries: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: I don't really like this category. The nature of the various "lands" in the Zelda series is highly ambiguous, with regards to their status as kingdoms/countries/provinces/continents etc. I...) |
GoldenChaos (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I don't really like this category. The nature of the various "lands" in the Zelda series is highly ambiguous, with regards to their status as kingdoms/countries/provinces/continents etc. I think this name makes too many assumptions, and the more general category Places serves the purpose much better. Maybe a nav template "lands in (Loz)" to be used on these pages would be better? Any thoughts? --[[User:Adamcox82|Adam]] <sup>([[User talk:Adamcox82|talk]])</sup> 13:11, 22 January 2008 (EST) | I don't really like this category. The nature of the various "lands" in the Zelda series is highly ambiguous, with regards to their status as kingdoms/countries/provinces/continents etc. I think this name makes too many assumptions, and the more general category Places serves the purpose much better. Maybe a nav template "lands in (Loz)" to be used on these pages would be better? Any thoughts? --[[User:Adamcox82|Adam]] <sup>([[User talk:Adamcox82|talk]])</sup> 13:11, 22 January 2008 (EST) | ||
:Better moved to something like "worlds," I think. | |||
Revision as of 18:45, 22 January 2008
I don't really like this category. The nature of the various "lands" in the Zelda series is highly ambiguous, with regards to their status as kingdoms/countries/provinces/continents etc. I think this name makes too many assumptions, and the more general category Places serves the purpose much better. Maybe a nav template "lands in (Loz)" to be used on these pages would be better? Any thoughts? --Adam (talk) 13:11, 22 January 2008 (EST)
- Better moved to something like "worlds," I think.