Forum:Legacy section for reworked topics: Difference between revisions
IceCastles (talk | contribs) m →Support |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
# I think a legacy section for major reworks is good to have in the wiki otherwise the information would be lost in the edit history, might not need to be as extensive as the current information [[User:Drgoku282|Drgoku282]] ([[User talk:Drgoku282|talk]]) 18:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC) | # I think a legacy section for major reworks is good to have in the wiki otherwise the information would be lost in the edit history, might not need to be as extensive as the current information [[User:Drgoku282|Drgoku282]] ([[User talk:Drgoku282|talk]]) 18:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
# I think this is a good idea but defining what is "significant" is going to be a challenge. BTD6 is almost approaching its 8th anniversary and in those years multiple large scale reworks have happened to all sorts of things. [[User:Overclockbtd|Overclockbtd]] ([[User talk:Overclockbtd|talk]]) 18:53, 5 April 2026 (UTC) | # I think this is a good idea but defining what is "significant" is going to be a challenge. BTD6 is almost approaching its 8th anniversary and in those years multiple large scale reworks have happened to all sorts of things. [[User:Overclockbtd|Overclockbtd]] ([[User talk:Overclockbtd|talk]]) 18:53, 5 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
# it's a good idea, but might i suggest a namespace instead of a section for certain topics? e.g. Legacy:Lych ... just throwing that out there. and i agree with the previous comment, we might need to define "significant". jungle's bounty rework wouldn't be significant enough for a namespace, but it would be worth acknowledging, you dig? [[User:IceCastles|IceCastles]] ([[User talk:IceCastles|talk]]) 20:24, 5 April 2026 (UTC) | |||
==Oppose== | ==Oppose== | ||
Revision as of 20:24, 5 April 2026
| This is an ongoing discussion about changing something about Blooncyclopedia. It must reach a consensus before being implemented. Deadline: Sunday, 19 April 2026 at 23:59 UTC |
Recently Ninja Kiwi introduced or will introduce major changes which completely changed how some things work in BTD6:
- Version 53 Jungle's Bounty ability
- Version 54 Lych rework
- Possibly Teams in version 54
So, should we add a "Legacy" or similar section on these articles to explain how they worked in the past when the changes are significant?
A change being "significant" enough to justify a Legacy section can be discussed in the article's discussion page.
Support
- I think a legacy section for major reworks is good to have in the wiki otherwise the information would be lost in the edit history, might not need to be as extensive as the current information Drgoku282 (talk) 18:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- I think this is a good idea but defining what is "significant" is going to be a challenge. BTD6 is almost approaching its 8th anniversary and in those years multiple large scale reworks have happened to all sorts of things. Overclockbtd (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
- it's a good idea, but might i suggest a namespace instead of a section for certain topics? e.g. Legacy:Lych ... just throwing that out there. and i agree with the previous comment, we might need to define "significant". jungle's bounty rework wouldn't be significant enough for a namespace, but it would be worth acknowledging, you dig? IceCastles (talk) 20:24, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
Oppose
Comments
In general, my philosophy is that articles should always be written from the perspective of the most up-to-date versions. For things like the reworked Lych and Jungle's Bounty, those still use the old mechanics in the console version, so it makes sense to have a section for the console version's mechanics for those. Not sure about things that aren't in the console version though, like teams. Polavux (talk) 18:57, 5 April 2026 (UTC)