|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chitalian8 Say... — Only by allowing strangers in can we find new ways to be ourselves. Life's little crossroads are often as simple as the pull of a trigger. — 22:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 This discussion has sort-of dropped off the past couple of days, but should our game ID tag for filenames be DI3.0 or DI? I personally lean towards just plain ol' DI, as having periods in filenames is sloppy, IMHO, and as we are not a Disney/Disney Infinity wiki, we don't need to go that into detail about specific KH allusions in the series, especially since KH has such a small presence in DI to begin with. Feel free to disagree.
On a semi-related point, for "Other appearances" sections, should we specifically refer to 3.0 in the subsection name, or just have the subsection be titled "Disney Infinity?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- The presence might grow over time. Byzantinefire - There are no strings on me
(talk) 23:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I prefer DI because it's shorter and neater. The subsection names should refer to 3.0 though, because the reference is only in that specific game. TheFifteenthMember 23:15, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Even if KH does begin to show up more in DI, I think having one subsection for each individual game a KH element appears in would be a little unwieldy. I'm still a fan of having just Disney Infinity in the header, but then specifying 3.0/4.0 whatever in the section itself. Chitalian8 23:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UnknownChaser —— Red like Roses.— 23:33, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>actually remembering the coding for tb.
I would assumed that we would used "3.0" in both applications, as far as I can tell, "Disney Infinity" and "Disney Infinity 3.0" are separate entries.
Its in the same way as how we separate FF files, i.e 13-2 vs 7 and mentions of different FF's entries in uses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, UC raises quite a valid point. Can the tag not be DI3? The abbreviations we use for the image names are mostly arbitrary anyway. TheFifteenthMember 23:45, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- That works better than DI3.0 for sure. The majority seems to prefer Disney Infinity 3.0 in the section headers as well, and I'm fine with what the community thinks is best. Chitalian8 00:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
