Talk:The Field - Revision history

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc: /* A filmography category? */ tedious, but not impossible

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 23:37:32 GMT

A filmography category?: tedious, but not impossible

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:37, 30 December 2019
Line 46:		Line 46:
	::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)		:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
-	~~::::::::::::This <i>is</i> a good idea, but someone really needs to get to work on this in order to make it happen. Or I guess we could use the previously mentioned bot. I dunno. -Strong Bad~~
	I still like this idea, but we need to decide on the details first. Should we make categories for all frequently-seen places, or just the Field? Should we use {{t\|Film}}, another template, or no template at all? And what should the categories be called? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 00:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)		I still like this idea, but we need to decide on the details first. Should we make categories for all frequently-seen places, or just the Field? Should we use {{t\|Film}}, another template, or no template at all? And what should the categories be called? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 00:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
		+	:This <i>is</i> a good idea, but someone really needs to get to work on this in order to make it happen. Or I guess we could use the previously mentioned bot. I dunno. -Strong Bad {{unsigned\|198.27.161.204\|23:07, 30 December 2019 (UTC)}}
		+	::It probably wouldn't be that bad. Just copy-pasting a category 175 times. I could probably do it. Still, some questions need to be answered about how this would work (see above). {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 23:37, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

198.27.161.204 at 23:07, 30 December 2019

198.27.161.204 — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 23:07:45 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:07, 30 December 2019
Line 46:		Line 46:
	::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)		:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
		+	::::::::::::This <i>is</i> a good idea, but someone really needs to get to work on this in order to make it happen. Or I guess we could use the previously mentioned bot. I dunno. -Strong Bad
	I still like this idea, but we need to decide on the details first. Should we make categories for all frequently-seen places, or just the Field? Should we use {{t\|Film}}, another template, or no template at all? And what should the categories be called? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 00:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)		I still like this idea, but we need to decide on the details first. Should we make categories for all frequently-seen places, or just the Field? Should we use {{t\|Film}}, another template, or no template at all? And what should the categories be called? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 00:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc: /* A filmography category? */ reply

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc — Fri, 24 Aug 2018 00:03:28 GMT

A filmography category?: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:03, 24 August 2018
Line 46:		Line 46:
	::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)		:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
		+	I still like this idea, but we need to decide on the details first. Should we make categories for all frequently-seen places, or just the Field? Should we use {{t\|Film}}, another template, or no template at all? And what should the categories be called? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 00:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc: /* A filmography category? */ reviving discussion

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc — Fri, 20 Oct 2017 21:44:46 GMT

A filmography category?: reviving discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:44, 20 October 2017
Line 45:		Line 45:
	:::::::::If someone is willing to do it then it's not too big a change though... {{User:The thing/sig}} 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		:::::::::If someone is willing to do it then it's not too big a change though... {{User:The thing/sig}} 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	:::::::::::This still really needs to happen. The category should be called "The Field Appearances" or "The Field Filmography" or something. Should this be done for other places as well? And [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] (or another bot-person), would it be possible for a bot to add that category to all the pages in this list, or at least a template? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 21:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc: /* A filmography category? */ Bot?

Gfdgsgxgzgdrc — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 06:59:37 GMT

A filmography category?: Bot?

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:59, 18 April 2017
Line 44:		Line 44:
	::::::::But like I said, this is way too big of a change for a Wiki that hardly anyone uses anymore. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 04:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::::But like I said, this is way too big of a change for a Wiki that hardly anyone uses anymore. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 04:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	:::::::::If someone is willing to do it then it's not too big a change though... {{User:The thing/sig}} 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		:::::::::If someone is willing to do it then it's not too big a change though... {{User:The thing/sig}} 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	::::::::::We could get a bot to do it. Maybe. {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 06:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

The thing: /* A filmography category? */ ?

The thing — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 05:31:30 GMT

A filmography category?: ?

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:31, 18 April 2017
Line 43:		Line 43:
	:::::::I support this; the page looks sloppy with all the uneven columns, and a category would clean the page up quite a bit. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 01:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		:::::::I support this; the page looks sloppy with all the uneven columns, and a category would clean the page up quite a bit. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 01:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	::::::::But like I said, this is way too big of a change for a Wiki that hardly anyone uses anymore. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 04:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::::But like I said, this is way too big of a change for a Wiki that hardly anyone uses anymore. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 04:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	:::::::::If someone is willing to do it then it's not too big a change though... {{User:The thing/sig}} 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

RickTommy: /* A filmography category? */

RickTommy — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 04:44:10 GMT

A filmography category?

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 18 April 2017
Line 42:		Line 42:
	::::::If [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc\|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]] is up for the challenge, I say go for it. {{User:The thing/sig}} 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::If [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc\|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]] is up for the challenge, I say go for it. {{User:The thing/sig}} 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
	:::::::I support this; the page looks sloppy with all the uneven columns, and a category would clean the page up quite a bit. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 01:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		:::::::I support this; the page looks sloppy with all the uneven columns, and a category would clean the page up quite a bit. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 01:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	::::::::But like I said, this is way too big of a change for a Wiki that hardly anyone uses anymore. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 04:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

The Knights Who Say Ni: /* A filmography category? */ support

The Knights Who Say Ni — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 01:29:29 GMT

A filmography category?: support

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:29, 18 April 2017
Line 41:		Line 41:
	:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)		:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
	::::::If [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc\|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]] is up for the challenge, I say go for it. {{User:The thing/sig}} 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)		::::::If [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc\|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]] is up for the challenge, I say go for it. {{User:The thing/sig}} 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	:::::::I support this; the page looks sloppy with all the uneven columns, and a category would clean the page up quite a bit. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 01:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

The thing: /* A filmography category? */ All yours

The thing — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 01:15:34 GMT

A filmography category?: All yours

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:15, 18 April 2017
Line 40:		Line 40:
	::::1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, [[:Category:Strong Bad Filmography]]? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)		::::1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, [[:Category:Strong Bad Filmography]]? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
	:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)		:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	::::::If [[User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc\|Gfdgsgxgzgdrc]] is up for the challenge, I say go for it. {{User:The thing/sig}} 01:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

RickTommy: /* A filmography category? */

RickTommy — Mon, 17 Apr 2017 07:27:09 GMT

A filmography category?

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:27, 17 April 2017
Line 39:		Line 39:
	:::Oppose. It's unwieldy, it's strange, and it's way too big for a Wiki that has faded into obscurity. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 08:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)		:::Oppose. It's unwieldy, it's strange, and it's way too big for a Wiki that has faded into obscurity. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 08:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
	::::1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, [[:Category:Strong Bad Filmography]]? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)		::::1. The current list is far more unwieldy and strange. 2. What about, say, [[:Category:Strong Bad Filmography]]? Is that way too big for a wiki that has faded into obscurity? And why does the wiki's obscurity matter? {{User:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc/sig‎}} 07:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
		+	:::::I mean the addition of the category. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 07:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)