Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-32767830-20190908182120/@comment-25356303-20191003191359

The consensus we seem to be leaning toward is to indeed create individual book articles for at least some books in the series. Since we are all more or less agreed that our current state is imperfect—as 73.Anon.52 pointed out, many new editors are a little confused about how to treat small revisions to books between titles—it doesn't exactly make sense to have this rule apply just to ESO on the basis that, were we to decide to do nothing, people would be confused. They're already confused, so we'd just be at square one. Since we are doing something, we may as well have it apply to all of the games. It's usually good to avoid unnecessary exceptions in guidelines, and apply them broadly where applicable.

So the real question now is:


 * Do we want to create game-specific book pages only when the content or meaning is changed?
 * Or do we want to create game-specific book pages if any material in the book is changed?

I am actually beginning to lean toward the second point there. It would be more work in the short term, but I would make the argument that punctuation and other minor fixes can actually change the meaning of a text as much as revisions to the actual words can. FishTank said that the SEO hit from creating these pages would be minimal, and there are not that many.

We'd also have to decide how to handle infoboxes. I'm not really keen on re-creating a ton of game-specific book infoboxes, considering Book exists and works quite well. I'd suggest that we simply continue to use Book on these individual pages, with all of the games' stats appearing in the collapsibles for comparison.