- This info should be more prominent I think at few places. Namespaces are not something casual Wikipedia user is familiar with. --Zblace (talk) 07:20, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
sorting of different types of spores?
For now it seems some spores are thematic, others focused on new data&media display forms...does it not make sense to split Alphabetic list into type based (as that is potentially more illustrative of use models)? --Zblace (talk) 19:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- You're correct that we have differences of both content and form here. If more of these grow, it could become confusing but as of now, it's a manageable list, I think. Koavf (talk) 17:07, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
- I agree it's managable for now. I actually do think each spore should have some specialization of both content and form, for example Geo Spore leaves might look a bit like Wikipedia articles but have more of an emphasis on maps and other geographic elements. I also think we should consider marking spores by what numerical "phase" they are in, to distingush between the less complete and the more complete ones, at some point. So for example, something that is just basically a name might be a spore in phase 0, something with one or two articles might be a spore in phase 1, something with one or two laurels might be a spore in phase 2, etc.--Pharos (talk) 19:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Stable enough for translation...
I am not sure if this one is stable enough for translation...but maybe it is important to have it checked once more before it does go there. I moved the list down and think it should maybe be displayed in slightly more visual way as horizontal list ? --Zblace (talk) 07:08, 11 August 2020 (UTC) I needed this to be translated in Croatian now, so it is quick&dirty version...had issues with post-translation edition :-( --Zblace (talk) 07:17, 14 August 2020 (UTC)