Talk:Inalienable rights: Difference between revisions
(A category?) |
|||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
--[[User:Tom|Tom]] 5 August 2005 08:55 (CEST) | --[[User:Tom|Tom]] 5 August 2005 08:55 (CEST) | ||
:You mean, just add <pre>[[Category:Inalienable Rights]]</pre> to the template? That would probably pull in a number of (mostly) unrelated pages, but if that's not an issue, it would probably work. --[[User:Dolohov|Dolohov]] 5 August 2005 15:39 (CEST) |
Revision as of 13:39, 5 August 2005
the list isn't really complete, I know I've forgotten a few, someone please add them. Also you can add a template to pages using the code:
{{Inalienable rights|description of the right}}
It will end up looking like:
Be aware that mulus in silva ambulat is one of a noble's inalienable rights in Battlemaster. Anyone who gives you orders about mulus in silva ambulat should be reported to the Titans or Magistrates.
--Nicholas July 26, 2005 20:50 (CEST)
- Excellent! --Tom 27 July 2005 09:30 (CEST)
- We had the same problem with stubs - should these go at the top or bottom of pages? They are more important than stub messages, but might break up the page. DorianGray 27 July 2005 11:58 (CEST)
- I'd say that they are probably important enough to break up the page. They're suppose to stand out, so that no one can claim "I didn't know." -- Nicholas July 27, 2005 18:44 (CEST)
A category?
I've just found out the hard way how difficult it is to get a list of inalienable rights.
Maybe we should make it a category instead? That way we would automatically get a list of all pages linked, and we can make a small list on the category page to flesh it out.
--Tom 5 August 2005 08:55 (CEST)
- You mean, just add
[[Category:Inalienable Rights]]
to the template? That would probably pull in a number of (mostly) unrelated pages, but if that's not an issue, it would probably work. --Dolohov 5 August 2005 15:39 (CEST)