Forum:Race Histories

Something's been bugging me for awhile, and not only is it something that I think requires a degree of consensus, but isn't something I'm keen to do as per the workload involved. Basically, it's race histories, or rather, those of the "big three." How on their pages history is given, but there's a main article link as well.

This is a good idea in principle, but I feel there's an inherant issue as well&mdash;when does something historic go on the race page, on the history page, or both? Repetition is bad, but so is leaving out pertinant info. It's almost put me off history editing in a sense as I don't want to do a job twice, and sometimes I feel iffy making the call.

Personally, I think it would serve the pages better to have a single main article link in species articles to the history, as through that, there'd be no repetition, and no line drawing. Or, what I would think would be the best solution, is to cut down on race histories, summing up the bare necessities. E.g. for the zerg, have a paragraph for each stage:


 * Origins
 * Expansion
 * Great War
 * Brood War
 * Interbellum
 * Second Great War

Again, "paragraph" for each. Short, but too the point, and it can leave the nitty gritty details for the history articles (e.g. says Kerrigan removed the cerebrates in the main article, but gets into the reasons behind it in the main article.

As I said, it's something that I think requires consensus, and has to be an all or nothing act for the "big three." Not going to start right now at any rate.--Hawki 12:21, July 13, 2011 (UTC)