Template talk:InDev

vs. ?
What is the intended difference between this template and the template?


 * The "Stub" template really implies that the article needs work and is serving as a placeholder until someone gets around to writing the full article ("You can help Chronicles of Elyria Wiki by expanding it".) In some cases, in fact probably many cases, that isn't an accurate depiction of the state of the article. "InDev" pages are actively maintained, and are more or less as complete as they can be given the amount of information available to us. In some cases, "InDev" could even be used on pages that are too long to qualify as a "Stub" but where substantially more information is expected at a later date. I think it just reflects much better on the Wiki and on CoE in general to explain "This is legitimately all the information we have right now," vs. "We haven't gone through the trouble of making this into a full article." The workflow of using both templates would be something like Make a stub -> Add information and references -> Switch to InDev once there isn't any more to add. -Imshada (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Your argument and definition are clear. I wonder how useful it will be, given that everything on the wiki is technically "In Dev" until the game launches. Not going to raise a fuss over it, though. :) Woogawoman (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you have a point there. :P Obviously any sort of game content page is going to change substantially between now and release, so it's hard to definitively determine what articles are "InDev" vs. normal (no Ambox)... perhaps length or "completeness"? I'd say that an article like Souls, for example, probably doesn't need "InDev". The devs have talked about souls pretty thoroughly (including at least one DJ if I remember correctly,) so we have a fair amount of information to base the article on, even if that information ends up being changed or added to. Contrast that with an article like Erishé, where we don't know much about their physical appearance, don't know anything about their culture or racial traits, and don't have any concept art to display; the page ends up looking very incomplete and "stub-like," at least until we get more information that we're allowed to add publicly. I see "InDev" primarily as a way of signaling, "Yes, we don't know much about this topic yet, but this is what little we do know." Once we get images for each tribe's infobox and some other crucial information like racial traits (which I believe they want to start releasing in the bi-weekly updates,) I think the Tribes articles will be okay to have "InDev" removed. -Imshada (talk) 21:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC)