Template talk:ACSH - Revision history

Darman36: /* DLC placement */

2026-07-01T00:55:43Z

DLC placement

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:55, 1 July 2026
Line 39:		Line 39:
	So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)		So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)
	:I am actually saying it's the opposite. It's a story drop that Ubisoft is also now putting link to in the featured events node (for reasons I can only speculate about). Does having it linked in both parts of the template break anything? If so I'd argue to only keep the very clearly non canon DbD and AoT memories in the Featured Events while Story Drops have canonical implications as seemed to be the original intent between the two categories. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 18:51, 30 June 2026 (CEST)		:I am actually saying it's the opposite. It's a story drop that Ubisoft is also now putting link to in the featured events node (for reasons I can only speculate about). Does having it linked in both parts of the template break anything? If so I'd argue to only keep the very clearly non canon DbD and AoT memories in the Featured Events while Story Drops have canonical implications as seemed to be the original intent between the two categories. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 18:51, 30 June 2026 (CEST)
			::No, the links work fine in the template. But if we have to change from Featured to Story, unlinking makes it easier to filter out the pages to correct through via Special:WhatLinksHere function, as opposed to trying to sort out which links actually are in Appearances section and which are transclusions via template at page bottom. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:55, 1 July 2026 (CEST)

Lacrossedeamon: /* DLC placement */

2026-06-30T16:52:08Z

DLC placement

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:52, 30 June 2026
Line 38:		Line 38:
	{{OpenTalk}}		{{OpenTalk}}
	So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)		So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)
			:I am actually saying it's the opposite. It's a story drop that Ubisoft is also now putting link to in the featured events node (for reasons I can only speculate about). Does having it linked in both parts of the template break anything? If so I'd argue to only keep the very clearly non canon DbD and AoT memories in the Featured Events while Story Drops have canonical implications as seemed to be the original intent between the two categories. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 18:51, 30 June 2026 (CEST)

Darman36: /DLC placement/

2026-06-30T00:20:20Z

DLC placement

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* Extra factions */

2025-03-26T21:32:19Z

Extra factions

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:32, 26 March 2025
Line 33:		Line 33:

	:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. Edit: Would just link them twice be a major problem? - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. Edit: Would just link them twice be a major problem? - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
			::::::::::Historically we have not linked twice but I am of the idea that we should especially since some characters are part of multiple groups such as Yagyu Munetoshi starting out as Nobutsuna's Students but becoming a scout for the League later. Personally I think he should be linked both times but that decision will need input from more editors before implementation. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 21:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

imported>The MFDZ at 20:28, 26 March 2025

2025-03-26T20:28:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:28, 26 March 2025
Line 32:		Line 32:
	::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

	:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. Edit: Would just link them twice be a major problem? - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

imported>The MFDZ at 20:22, 26 March 2025

2025-03-26T20:22:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:22, 26 March 2025
Line 31:		Line 31:
	:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

			:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* Extra factions */

2025-03-26T19:25:15Z

Extra factions

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:25, 26 March 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:
	::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
			::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

imported>Darman36: /* Extra factions */

2025-03-26T13:50:41Z

Extra factions

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:50, 26 March 2025
Line 26:		Line 26:
	::I like conferring on formatting decisions. I do think we need to decide if the reformed Kakushiba ikki counts as Assassins and if yes who does that all constitute (all members of the settlement, just people in the league node on the objective board, or just usable allies). [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 00:04, 20 March 2025 (UTC)		::I like conferring on formatting decisions. I do think we need to decide if the reformed Kakushiba ikki counts as Assassins and if yes who does that all constitute (all members of the settlement, just people in the league node on the objective board, or just usable allies). [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 00:04, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::Now that this is gradually expanding with info, I see it's getting quite long with all the factions. Do we really need to have separate sections for everyone between the Shinbakufu down to Others? Is there some common trait between all of them beyond "NPC to kill" that we can put them in a larger category and just do "GROUP 1 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}} • GROUP 2 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}}" etc? – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 03:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)		:::Now that this is gradually expanding with info, I see it's getting quite long with all the factions. Do we really need to have separate sections for everyone between the Shinbakufu down to Others? Is there some common trait between all of them beyond "NPC to kill" that we can put them in a larger category and just do "GROUP 1 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}} • GROUP 2 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}}" etc? – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 03:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

	::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)		::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
			:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* Extra factions */

2025-03-26T04:02:06Z

Extra factions

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:02, 26 March 2025
Line 29:		Line 29:
	::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)		::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
			::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

imported>Soranin: /* Extra factions */

2025-03-26T01:33:41Z

Extra factions

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:33, 26 March 2025
Line 28:		Line 28:

	::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)		::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
			:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:55, 1 July 2026
Line 39:		Line 39:
	So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)		So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)
	:I am actually saying it's the opposite. It's a story drop that Ubisoft is also now putting link to in the featured events node (for reasons I can only speculate about). Does having it linked in both parts of the template break anything? If so I'd argue to only keep the very clearly non canon DbD and AoT memories in the Featured Events while Story Drops have canonical implications as seemed to be the original intent between the two categories. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 18:51, 30 June 2026 (CEST)		:I am actually saying it's the opposite. It's a story drop that Ubisoft is also now putting link to in the featured events node (for reasons I can only speculate about). Does having it linked in both parts of the template break anything? If so I'd argue to only keep the very clearly non canon DbD and AoT memories in the Featured Events while Story Drops have canonical implications as seemed to be the original intent between the two categories. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 18:51, 30 June 2026 (CEST)
			::No, the links work fine in the template. But if we have to change from Featured to Story, unlinking makes it easier to filter out the pages to correct through via Special:WhatLinksHere function, as opposed to trying to sort out which links actually are in Appearances section and which are transclusions via template at page bottom. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:55, 1 July 2026 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:22, 26 March 2025
Line 31:		Line 31:
	:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

			:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:25, 26 March 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:
	::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
			::::::::Not sure how that would solve your initial concern? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 19:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:50, 26 March 2025
Line 26:		Line 26:
	::I like conferring on formatting decisions. I do think we need to decide if the reformed Kakushiba ikki counts as Assassins and if yes who does that all constitute (all members of the settlement, just people in the league node on the objective board, or just usable allies). [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 00:04, 20 March 2025 (UTC)		::I like conferring on formatting decisions. I do think we need to decide if the reformed Kakushiba ikki counts as Assassins and if yes who does that all constitute (all members of the settlement, just people in the league node on the objective board, or just usable allies). [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 00:04, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::Now that this is gradually expanding with info, I see it's getting quite long with all the factions. Do we really need to have separate sections for everyone between the Shinbakufu down to Others? Is there some common trait between all of them beyond "NPC to kill" that we can put them in a larger category and just do "GROUP 1 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}} • GROUP 2 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}}" etc? – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 03:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)		:::Now that this is gradually expanding with info, I see it's getting quite long with all the factions. Do we really need to have separate sections for everyone between the Shinbakufu down to Others? Is there some common trait between all of them beyond "NPC to kill" that we can put them in a larger category and just do "GROUP 1 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}} • GROUP 2 {{c\|member 1 • member 2}}" etc? – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 03:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

	::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)		::::I think Darman has a good point and we should decide if the option of having them on the same section as "Objectives" or "Targets" or something like that is better. I did a little test on [[User:The MFDZ/Drafts\|here]] to see if the section got too crowded and I think its fine. I also think we should change how certain names appear, such as having the Godai appear by his element (i.e. putting them as <nowiki>[[Rokkaku Yoshimitsu\|Void]]</nowiki>) and removing all "The ____ Yamabushi" since its a bit redundant - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 17:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
	:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::I'm more partial to "Targets" over "Objectives", but yeah, that looks a lot better than the current template. - [[User:Soranin\|Soranin]] ([[User talk:Soranin\|talk]]) 01:33, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::I'd probably go with "Minor targets" rather than just "Targets" to distinguish them from the Shinbafuku. My question is now some of these target groups are proper factions in their own rights like the Godai Shinobi or the Karui Eikyou, do we link them in the "Minor targets" Character group or just the Factions group? [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:02, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
			:::::::We could do both and have them as their own sub-faction within "Minor targets". Navboxes can have at least a few nested subgroups, as my edit to the Draft shows. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 13:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:20, 30 June 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	We can wait the release of the game to discuss about this point. In 1580, King Philip II of Spain became king of Portugal after the death of his predeccessor in Morocco. The two iberian empires were in a personnal union (same king but two crowns) known as the Iberian Union from 1580 to 1640. As the game began in 1579 and go at least in 1581, do we still referred to the Portuguese empire or to the Iberian Union ? [[User:Francesco75\|Francesco75]] ([[User talk:Francesco75\|talk]]) 21:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)		We can wait the release of the game to discuss about this point. In 1580, King Philip II of Spain became king of Portugal after the death of his predeccessor in Morocco. The two iberian empires were in a personnal union (same king but two crowns) known as the Iberian Union from 1580 to 1640. As the game began in 1579 and go at least in 1581, do we still referred to the Portuguese empire or to the Iberian Union ? [[User:Francesco75\|Francesco75]] ([[User talk:Francesco75\|talk]]) 21:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

	==Are Yasuke and Fujibayashi Nagato the members of Assassin ?==		==Are Yasuke and Fujibayashi Nagato the members of Assassin?==
	No evidence proof that Yasuke and Fujibayashi Nagato are the members of Assassin.		No evidence proof that Yasuke and Fujibayashi Nagato are the members of Assassin.
	[[User:Andy5362430\|Andy5362430]] ([[User talk:Andy5362430\|talk]]) 23:33, 18 May 2024 (UTC)		[[User:Andy5362430\|Andy5362430]] ([[User talk:Andy5362430\|talk]]) 23:33, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

	==Akechi clan appear in the game==		==Akechi clan appear in the game==
	[[File:Akechi clan crest.webp\|thumb]]		[[File:Akechi clan crest.webp\|thumb\|200px]]
	[[File:Yasuke and Akechi clan crest banner.webp\|thumb]]		[[File:Yasuke and Akechi clan crest banner.webp\|thumb\|250px]]
	[[File:Akechi clan crest in Fukuchiyama.webp\|thumb]]		[[File:Akechi clan crest in Fukuchiyama.webp\|thumb\|250px]]
	We can see Emblem of Akechi clan in Assassin's Creed Shadows - Extended Gameplay Walkthrough and First Look Gameplay Trailer. {{unsigned\|Andy5362430}}		We can see Emblem of Akechi clan in Assassin's Creed Shadows - Extended Gameplay Walkthrough and First Look Gameplay Trailer. {{unsigned\|Andy5362430}}
	:That's a good catch Andy! :) Remember to sign your messages with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) in the future. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)		:That's a good catch Andy! :) Remember to sign your messages with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) in the future. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Line 34:		Line 34:
	:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. Edit: Would just link them twice be a major problem? - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		:::::::::I think the factions should be linked inside the "Minor targets" box, even though some of them are actual factions more than just a collection of people. [[Template:ACII\|Assassin's Creed 2 template]] solves the "Assassins - House of Auditore" conflict by having them appear twice, first linked and second as regular text. Perhaps a similar option could be used on this one, with proper factions appearing again on the faction navbox unlinked? Although this leads to determine which are proper factions and which are not to have them appear twice. Edit: Would just link them twice be a major problem? - [[User:The MFDZ\|The MFDZ]] ([[User talk:The MFDZ\|talk]]) 20:22, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
	::::::::::Historically we have not linked twice but I am of the idea that we should especially since some characters are part of multiple groups such as Yagyu Munetoshi starting out as Nobutsuna's Students but becoming a scout for the League later. Personally I think he should be linked both times but that decision will need input from more editors before implementation. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 21:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)		::::::::::Historically we have not linked twice but I am of the idea that we should especially since some characters are part of multiple groups such as Yagyu Munetoshi starting out as Nobutsuna's Students but becoming a scout for the League later. Personally I think he should be linked both times but that decision will need input from more editors before implementation. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 21:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

			==DLC placement==
			{{OpenTalk}}
			So which is it? Is the Black Cross stuff in "Story Drops" or "Featured Events"? I'm getting conflicting info from 3 different people: Soranin said Ubisoft had put it as "Featured", Lacrosse says it's been quietly recategorized as "Story", but Kulurak says the quest log has it as "Featured". <s>Ubisoft's annoying inconsistency is another matter.</s> I've temporarily unlinked them both in the template until we can solve this. – [[User:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Old English Text MT;font-size:15px;color:#">Darman</span>]] ([[User talk:Darman36\|<span style="font-family:Viner Hand ITC;color:#">talk</span>]]) 02:20, 30 June 2026 (CEST)

Template talk:ACSH - Revision history

Darman36: /* DLC placement */

Lacrossedeamon: /* DLC placement */

Darman36: /*DLC placement*/

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* Extra factions */

imported>The MFDZ at 20:28, 26 March 2025

imported>The MFDZ at 20:22, 26 March 2025

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* Extra factions */

imported>Darman36: /* Extra factions */

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* Extra factions */

imported>Soranin: /* Extra factions */

Darman36: /DLC placement/