Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1251315-20150324091206/@comment-27033815-20150324122610

Hmm. I seem to be somewhere in the middle, myself. While I could point out there isn't but so much lore, and it may be a poor idea to add one sentence and declare that it needs an article of it's own. It would easily add pointless pages to the wiki, which get old very fast.

However, when there is lore in an article, it would, in a way, prevent the player from knowing what they want to actually learn, and slow them down. Also, when you can't separate fact from fiction in a complete sense, it would be better to have one page to show them both.

So, I would have to say, make a new article for the larger lore articles that could have a slight debate into them, leave in the lore that isn't that much and that could easily be said in a few lines.

Striking the heart of the matter, however, is a little harder. The lore from books, which I literally take the time to read in-game, is fantastic! However, then comes the whole issue of organising the information. We have a grand library here, with many shelves, and many readers. However, (as I seem to love that word,) the vast majority of wiki users here don't want to take an hour to fix all the links, as Wulfharth said. To be honest, I don't either.

But, when we have a great deal of information in an article that is only lore already, and a small amount of it is actually in-game, it basically already is a lore article. So, in a sense, we already have them.

The main issues with lore articles are the following: 1:People copy and paste too much. This creates legal issues. 2:People often overlink or forget to link articles. 3:When people get tired, they make mistakes. And there is a lot to be tired about when doing this.

I would have to go with new pages for the great amounts of lore, but when you have about two sentences of it, it's just about pointless.

Post-Script: Sorry for typing about a whole page of information as to just my opinion.