Talk:Ford Motor Company: Difference between revisions
imported>Kaloneous mNo edit summary |
imported>Smoke3723 →Delete page?: Reassuring Kaloneous of precedents |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:If the organisation is only mentioned once in a Subject 16 puzzle, then they should go on the Abstergo page under "known fronts" or something. We can't duplicate Wikipedia simply because of a name-drop.[[User:Smoke3723|Smoke3723]] 02:53, August 2, 2011 (UTC) | :If the organisation is only mentioned once in a Subject 16 puzzle, then they should go on the Abstergo page under "known fronts" or something. We can't duplicate Wikipedia simply because of a name-drop.[[User:Smoke3723|Smoke3723]] 02:53, August 2, 2011 (UTC) | ||
:I get what you are saying and I see from the Henry Ford article that it now covers it more adequately. My thinking was that it adds a bit of trivia to the overall story in the glyphs (that does not get much time in -game anyways). Plus i would be fearful of other pages (like the ones I mentioned above) then being in risk of being deleted too. Just my thoughts anyways. [[User:Kaloneous|Kaloneous]] 02:59, August 2, 2011 (UTC) | :I get what you are saying and I see from the Henry Ford article that it now covers it more adequately. My thinking was that it adds a bit of trivia to the overall story in the glyphs (that does not get much time in -game anyways). Plus i would be fearful of other pages (like the ones I mentioned above) then being in risk of being deleted too. Just my thoughts anyways. [[User:Kaloneous|Kaloneous]] 02:59, August 2, 2011 (UTC) | ||
You're right that NASA should stay, because it's had a major impact on the game world: it retrieved the Apple from the Moon. CIA and BP are edge cases: we have information for their activities, but whether or not they're too small is a debate for another day. Ford the Company, however, is given a cryptic reference in a personal letter from Ford the person -- a reference that could just as easily go on Henry's page. But if we give Ford Motor Company its own page, how can we make it longer than two sentences and still keep it AC-relevant? | |||
[[User:Smoke3723|Smoke3723]] 04:39, August 2, 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:39, 2 August 2011
Delete page?
The Ford Motor Company itself doesn't appear enough in the AC universe to justify its own article; the information contained in this article is mentioned on Henry Ford's page anyway. Smoke3723 00:01, August 1, 2011 (UTC)
I think that it does add more background information to the activities of the Templars and even if this was to be considered a serious candidate for deletion the articles like NASA, the CIA, BP etc would also have to be considered. Even pages like Syria would be called into question. What I mean is that this article (and the aforementioned ones) and more accessible depth for readers for a story that has such immense depth as Assassin's Creed. Just my opinion anyways. Kaloneous 00:08, August 1, 2011 (UTC)
- If the organisation is only mentioned once in a Subject 16 puzzle, then they should go on the Abstergo page under "known fronts" or something. We can't duplicate Wikipedia simply because of a name-drop.Smoke3723 02:53, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
- I get what you are saying and I see from the Henry Ford article that it now covers it more adequately. My thinking was that it adds a bit of trivia to the overall story in the glyphs (that does not get much time in -game anyways). Plus i would be fearful of other pages (like the ones I mentioned above) then being in risk of being deleted too. Just my thoughts anyways. Kaloneous 02:59, August 2, 2011 (UTC)
You're right that NASA should stay, because it's had a major impact on the game world: it retrieved the Apple from the Moon. CIA and BP are edge cases: we have information for their activities, but whether or not they're too small is a debate for another day. Ford the Company, however, is given a cryptic reference in a personal letter from Ford the person -- a reference that could just as easily go on Henry's page. But if we give Ford Motor Company its own page, how can we make it longer than two sentences and still keep it AC-relevant? Smoke3723 04:39, August 2, 2011 (UTC)