Talk:Stagnation Patterns: Difference between revisions

From IFWiki

mNo edit summary
(Suggested formatting change)
 
Line 4: Line 4:


I don't think that's the immediate problem. I think this is a very rough list of things and we need to simply organize it. I have some thoughts too. I want to rename this and the other article to some sort of patterns articles too. This one might be "Progression Patterns". --[[User:David Cornelson|David Cornelson]] 18:47, 28 Feb 2005 (Central Standard Time)
I don't think that's the immediate problem. I think this is a very rough list of things and we need to simply organize it. I have some thoughts too. I want to rename this and the other article to some sort of patterns articles too. This one might be "Progression Patterns". --[[User:David Cornelson|David Cornelson]] 18:47, 28 Feb 2005 (Central Standard Time)
Perhaps a Definition List format rather than a Bulleted List would clarify the structure? I've redone the first section to illustrate this. --[[User:Roger|Roger]] 06:42, 31 March 2007 (EST)

Latest revision as of 11:42, 31 March 2007

I tried to categorize all of the different "things", but as you can see the list is a bit unwieldly. I think we almost need to have some sort of short name for each description, and then complete the categorization. That way the TOC will look clean and the reader will be able to discern different areas of stuckness. --David Cornelson 07:11, 28 Feb 2005 (Central Standard Time)

Unwieldy is a nice way of putting it. For starters, is there a nice way to ask the Table of Contents generator to only list the sections but not any of the subsections, subsubsections, etc.? -- David Welbourn 07:49, 28 Feb 2005 (Central Standard Time)

I don't think that's the immediate problem. I think this is a very rough list of things and we need to simply organize it. I have some thoughts too. I want to rename this and the other article to some sort of patterns articles too. This one might be "Progression Patterns". --David Cornelson 18:47, 28 Feb 2005 (Central Standard Time)

Perhaps a Definition List format rather than a Bulleted List would clarify the structure? I've redone the first section to illustrate this. --Roger 06:42, 31 March 2007 (EST)