Talk:List of post-release content in Splatoon: Difference between revisions

From Inkipedia, the Splatoon wiki
Latest comment: 21 June 2016 by Bzeep in topic Bolding
(yerp)
Line 11: Line 11:
Is there a reason why the first four sections are bolded? Otherwise it should be removed (it's annoying).
Is there a reason why the first four sections are bolded? Otherwise it should be removed (it's annoying).
{{User:Mr squid/Sig}} 17:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
{{User:Mr squid/Sig}} 17:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
:Ah yeah, I got it. Dunno why they were. :u Thanks for mentioning it! --<font face="Corbel">[[User:Bzeep|<font color="#f2992e"><i>Bzeep!</i></font>]] [[User talk:Bzeep|<small><font color="#f7c282">talk</font></small>]]</font> 18:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:03, 21 June 2016

Rename page to something else

As 99.99% of us know, the content so far has all been on disc, and it doesn't even need to be downloaded making it completely wrong to call it DLC. I'm not saying we should delete the page, as it's possible that future DLC will be added, and technically the future patches adding the Japanese costumes count as DLC. My only guess for why it's called DLC is that a better alternative was not found, so everything's just called that. Any thoughts on alternate, more appropriate names? PPLToast (talk) 04:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's pretty much why. "On-disc downloadable content" is both limiting and demeaning. In a way, the content is still downloadable – you download the flag that tells the game "ok, this weapon can be un-hidden now". It might be easier to keep it as-is. a) People who search for it will likely search for this term. b) When actual DLC comes, the page will make more sense, so no point bothering about a temporary problem. c) There's no better name. – EspyoT 08:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Repeated Information

Why is it that there's a table that has all the existing DLC, and then a part of the page further on that discusses existing DLC? There's really not enough of a difference to warrant it being discussed two different times (in my opinion). It should be one or the other, and I prefer the non-table part of the article. IanMS00 (talk) 19:11, 15 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bolding

Is there a reason why the first four sections are bolded? Otherwise it should be removed (it's annoying). User:Mr squid/Sig 17:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah yeah, I got it. Dunno why they were. :u Thanks for mentioning it! --Bzeep! talk 18:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]