Category talk:Candidates for deletion/Archive 1

Please use this page to discuss pages that have been labeled for deletion.

Armor - Don't Delete it!!!

Altair may not, to the literal extent, have armor, but he does have is multiple tactics and such that 'protect' you, and is that not what armor does? He has his 'social stealth', his inhuman acrobatic abilites, and allies that help him (Vigilantes and Scholars)...I say, don't delete it, jsut say that no LITERAL armor exists, but he does have a multitude of other 'armors' on his side. —unsigned comment by Drevas Oril (talk · contr)

Interesting. Wouldn't a better name be more fitting, though? "Armor" suggests metal plates, or chain mail, not free-running and blending. Someone once suggested an "Abilities" page, to include those and upgrades that Altair gains. Don't be afraid to go out there and do it- by all means, feel free to start something. Cymbalta 18:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

imo, armor has pretty strongly suggests some sort of physical defense, and the water absorbing cloth that Altair wears doesn't seem to qualify. At best I think the armor topic should be a note that no armor exists (so that no new armor pages crop up), then a quick discussion of his other defenses and links to 'em. Personally, I'd rather see it deleted or renamed to defenses or somesuch. --tarkisflux 19:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC) UPDATED I added to the armor page along the lines talked about here. Still not sure it's worth keeping, but I think it's better than it was. --TarkisFlux 20:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Definitely better then it was. Another strong edit like that, and there won't be a reason to keep the {{delete}} tag. Cymbalta 20:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I added some more to the armor page, mostly detailing the armor that various soldiers in different cities wear. figure there's enough there now to pull the {{stub}} and {{delete}} tags, so i did :-). --TarkisFlux 01:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Again, it seems we could compromise here. Keep the page and rename it as Tarkis Flux suggests to "Abilities" or "Defenses". The word "armor" has a wide variety of implications, as Drevas Oril points out. People have "emotional armor" as well, also known as "defense mechanisms" but that doesn't make them metallic or machines...simply machine-like in their employment: automatic. Altair's various defense mechanisms are ingrained in him, because of his training and experience - like breathing. Automatic. May I point out that his very large and metal decorated knife belt and greaves are good for deflecting arrows and lessening the effect of glancing sword blows, but most of those archers can't shoot worth a damn anyway! But yes, most of the public thinks of metal helmets, chestplates, greaves (arm and leg), and chain mail when confronted with the word "armor". --Maskim xul 23:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Prince of Persia

I think the article should be kept but changed (I am willing to do these changes, if somone else agrees) I think the page should have a brief two-three sentance description of hte series, a list of the games (no information on the games just the list) and any similarities worht mentioning between prince of persia and assassins creed can be added to the page, at the bottom we can have an exteranl links and link to the prince of persia wikia (if there is one) and wikipedia's article on prince of persia. Hunterj|My talkThis is my temporary sig|

I don't think it should be kept. This is the Assassins creed wiki, not the prince of Persia wiki. If we don't delete, users could think they could ad any game and defend it with arguments like: 'King Richard appears in it or There is also an assassin in...' - Kai - Talk 09:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

It should be kept. Only because it is Ubisoft. AC-42 19:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Can we compromise here? Taking Hunterj's suggestions and AC-42's, keep it but pare it down and put a link to a PoP wiki (if there is one). Just mention where the two games cross paths and make it clear that this is the Assassin's Creed wiki...because Waterkai has a valid point. --Maskim xul 23:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Delete because it is the wrong wiki. MacMed 20:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Delete. As said, this is the Assassin's Creed Wiki, not the Ubisoft Wiki. If Prince of Persia is here, makes just as much sense to have a Rayman article. XPeaceChill 14:50, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Delete. The two above me are correct. 68.48.225.39 19:22, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Altier

Altier Wtf? AC-42 17:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Ezio Audtiore de Firenze

Misspelling. Real article: Ezio Auditore de Firenze AC-42 20:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know that the page itself should be deleted, but perhaps heavily edited. And "Renascientist" or whatever it was??? Yeah. It's "Renaissance". All that aside, it's nice to have a picture of Ezio. I, for one, am happy to see how they incorporated Altair's gear into the 15th century Florentine style. Nice threads. He does deserve a place here - don't you think? --Maskim xul 23:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

yeah, but the artice he's pointing at is a du^licate, but just misspelled. - Kai - Talk 11:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Ps4

Not related in any way to Assassin's Creed. MacMed 20:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Assassin's Creed Assassins

This category is being chosen over simply "Category: Assassins" because why exactly? It's REDUNDANT. If they're on this website of course they're assassins from Assassin's Creed. Why put that in there? The current "Assassins" one should be deleted and this new one taking its place should have its name changed to simply "Assassins." Oddsock 15:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all, please sign in your post with Four tildes. ^^

Second, why I put it that way? because we're anticipating AC2, with different Assassins of course. So, the plan is to make sub-categories "Assassin's Creed Assassins" and "Assassin's Creed II Assassins" to differentiate the characters and avoid confusion. I'm trying to make the categorizing system as clear as possible. Oh, and I haven't done revamping it btw~ - SilverSummoner^TaLk 15:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the signature thing, I'm still new to using Wiki stuff. I understand the differentiation, but I see no real need for it. Every Assassin, be they in AC1 or AC2, will be revealed as being in either game in their individual articles. If anyone's looking up any assassins, they should be able to recognize them easily by name and find them in that single database. Just saying, I think two separate ones really aren't necessary. Oddsock 15:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Assassins here not only refer to Ezio or Altair, but also other minor assassins character such as Malik, Kadar, Al Mualim, and even Rafiq.

If anyone's looking up any assassins, they should be able to recognize them easily by name and find them in that single database.

What if that "anyone" is someone who doesn't know anything at all bout Assassin's Creed?

If you're still new to wiki, that means you still new to MediaWiki and all wiki stuff? - SilverSummoner^TaLk 03:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm new to editing Wiki and such, but of course I've used Wiki sources before. "What if that "anyone" is someone who doesn't know anything at all bout Assassin's Creed?" Thanks for teaching me how to quote, I didn't know the quotes would make something italicized (despite the nice box next to this text window). Now about the question: There are only so many assassins, and if anyone is playing a game and looking up names, they should recognize those names from within the game they are playing. If not, it's likely AC2 Assassin names will be European and AC1's will be Arabic. I am also thinking of my own experience of browsing Wikis for fun, and it's been no problem to me to surf databases of characters or weapons or whatever without having them all divided up into smaller, more precise databases based on which game they're in or any other kind of differentiating factors (I use Fallout 3 Wiki as my primary example). I understand the want to separate characters, but honestly I don't think it's necessary. Oddsock 15:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Well then.. what;s your suggestion actually? And I still not very clear of the advantage of having all of the pages squeezed into Category:Assassins. Mind to explain? and what is the disadvantage of the current categorizing system so that it makes you feel that it should be changed? - SilverSummoner^TaLk 13:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

My suggestion is, as you just stated, to keep them all in one category or list. What's the advantage? Simplification. What's the disadvantage to two separate categories? Complication. Nobody's getting squeezed, there aren't hundreds or barely even tens of Assassins in the current category. I can't imagine AC2 will add many more. Why differentiate and make someone look harder than they have to? I have a feeling we're at an impasse ("no, we are at an end") and more opinions on the matter are required to make a decision. If the majority thinks that two separate databases is better, then fine, but I'm just sticking with what I think is the right, not-overly-complicated thing to do. Oddsock 20:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Complicated? What's so complicated about that? it's just "this assassin's from the first game, thie one is from the second game". What I'm trying to achieve is not complication or what, but accuracy. Look, I have experience with category so I know how annoying it would be (unless if you don't mind the messy categorizing~) when we want to categorize new articles bout new sequel/prequel of the game. I just want to avoid that and get more accurate bout the category. - SilverSummoner^TaLk 07:15, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

The complication, as I said, lies in dividing a category that doesn't need to be split. In my experience with viewing wikis, too many things have been split into small micro-categories, making it hard to look for other related wiki pages without having to click around a bunch. Like I said before, we're not going to agree so let's just see what others say and go with that. 68.48.225.39 22:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

making it hard to look for other related wiki pages without having to click around a bunch.
eh... you do know that we have navigation bar, right? that thing is created for the sake of easy navigation between pages, just so you know. Moreover, that category needs to be split, because, like I said before, there'll be new games coming around this year and for the sake of neat categorizing and easy updates when we add more pages, those Assassin category should be split. That would be weird and very messy if we split the Assassination Target category, but we don't split the Assassins Category.

let's see what others say
o yea, that should do better. But the problem is, there's almost no one here. Elecbullet used to edit a lot, but he seems to be taking a wikibreak now. Rather than just debating bout category, I think we should just start editing some pages instead. Your edit count suggest you're really new to wiki editing... - SilverSummoner^TaLk 05:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why you keep harping at my new account. Regardless of having an account or not I know when and how to spot something that needs editing -- you should keep that in mind. Being new does not always mean being inexperienced. You mention a navigation bar but why force one to have to jump between two categories about people, just in different games? I understand that AC2 is coming out but I really don't think this split is necessary. Look at other wikis like the Halo wiki and you'll see that various categories like characters, weaponry, and vehicles are not split into little per-game categories and they are all still very easy to find and understand.

Brute

Brute <-- redundant page for Brutes. 03:40, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

ah in case you haven't notice, I've turned it into redirect page. - SilverSummoner^TaLk 03:40, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

Assassin's Logo

I don't think this should be deleted, but if we are doing this, we need a clean image of the Assasins logo in AC1 and a clean image of the Assassins logo from the villa, ideally from the flags, not that concept art image.

I also think that this shouldn't be deleted. It could give information on the logo. But, we do need a lot of pictures, and good ones too. --Silver Mage Ω 10:19, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed that it needs to stay. Its a pretty essential part to the cannon. (Spikepit 11:02, January 8, 2010 (UTC))

I think a section on the Assassins page is enough for this.--PhantomT1412 18:30, January 8, 2010 (UTC)