From Discworld MUD Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


At the moment, this page has details on a lot of quite different spiders - some are NPCs, some are objects - and this seems to be creating a few commonization problems:

  • The infobox talks about tanning and harvestable glands, but that obviously doesn't apply to the 'object' spiders (the granny's chimney type).
  • Description and Location have become Description(s) and Location(s)
  • Each line in the Uses and Notes sections has to have qualifiers indicating what sort of spider it applies to.

I think it would be better if:

  • This page were converted into a disambiguation page
  • Specific pages are created for each type of spider - eg.
    • Giant spider
    • Gigantic pale spider
    • Spider (gatherable)
    • Spider (cabbage warehouse)
  • Things like bestiary infoboxes, etc are applied to each as appropriate.

--Chat 22:41, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I did consider pages for each spider (note that following logic also applies to other critters with more than one type, such as 'fox'), but I feel that then it may become way too busy in the top level page. In other words, too many 'spider' pages. I purposefully chose to work with the spiders in order to bring to light various potential display problems and see what other solutions might pop up. I have tried out some changes on this page to see how they may work out. Groth 05:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Hum. What if the top-level page just linked to the disambiguation pages? For the most part, anyway--it might be useful to have certain specific creatures separated out even in the table, if they behave differently as far as the information in the table goes. I'm thinking of desert lions (which attack) vs. savannah lions (which don't) (and possibly also vs. mountain lions, which don't attack, but which flee and ambush, and which aren't really lions anyway), and normal spiders vs. giant spiders. And maybe rats vs. evil-looking rats, too.
Or if critters that were largely similar across areas shared a page (I'm not sure that having a separate page for every type of rabbit or fox would be helpful), and ones that had significantly different behavior had separate pages... unless one was the adult and one was the young (in that case it's sort of... thematically appropriate to put them together, isn't it? Because in IC terms they're basically the same, and in practical terms I think you always find the young with the adults anyway).
--Ilde 05:32, 21 May 2010 (UTC)