|“||Drop logs do not belong in articles. If you want to record drop logs, make a subpage on your user page.||”|
That seems quite contradictory, with the addition of our charm logs. I'm thinking we need to tweak the wording something like this.
|“||Articles about monsters that drop Charms should include a transclusion to a subpage (Pagename/Charm Log) that uses Template:Charm data to log the drop percentage of each charm. Logs of any other sort do not belong in the article namespace, users can instead create drop logs within the user namespace on their userpage or on a subpage.||”|
Weak oppose - While I support your proposal in principle, I can't support it due to practical reasons. Charms are easy to keep track of, since there are only four possible charm drops and they can easily be counted. For regular drop logs, there are many different items that are placed into the drop tables. Keeping track of every one of them would provide logistical nightmares. Unless the drops are written down, it's hard to make an accurate number of them. I alch all the low level armor/weapon drops I get from Moss giants, so I really can't tell you at the end of the day what I got. Charms are a different story: since they're stackable, they can easily be tracked. --King LiquidheliumTalk 01:37, February 22, 2010 (UTC)
- He's not proposing adding drop logs to the mainspace, just an addition to a policy stating that charm logs are the only acceptable drop log in the mainspace.
Support - Seems like a good edition. Since charms are technically a drop, we should list that charm logs are the only acceptable drop log in mainspace.01:40, February 22, 2010 (UTC)
Support - I think that the current setup of only including drop logs for charms (which are fairly simple to keep track of) and no other logs is fair, and I think that we should clarify our policy to allow that. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.
Be bold - and just do it.11:42, February 22, 2010 (UTC)
Support - Makes sense. Frede 12:45, February 22, 2010 (UTC)