Forum:Charm log namespace
Charm logs would be easier to manage if they were in their own namespace. Thus, I am proposing that the CharmLog namespace be created for charm logs, similar to the Exchange namespace in effect for GE prices. I was under the impression that this was previously rejected by the community, but I have learned that the original proposal did not mention a separate namespace.
Support - Love the idea, but DEAR GODS, what a move that will be!23:38, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
- User:TLULbot will take care of it. --LiquidTalk 23:39, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
- oh good, cuz thats a lot of pages. 23:46, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
Sugesstion - Instead of CharmLog, maybe just Charm, since we don't have a GrandExchange we have Exchange..... tiny time savers FTW!!!23:46, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
Pending/Oppose - A new namespace for charm logs? I really don't see what the problem is with having them in sub pages. We only get one more custom namespace, and I don't want to spend it on something that appears to be potentially working fine otherwise. What advantages do having the charm logs in their own namespace pose?23:51, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
- WHAT! We only get one more??? 01:28, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Neutral - I lovers custom namespaces, but this would cause a few things:
- A lot of work moving pages; even assisted by a bot.
- Less organized; pages in a namespace and not a subpage.
- Charm log: doesn't sound very nice as a namespace D:
- Another namespace means more organizational work, especially for bots.