Category talk:General Orders
From FEInfobase
(Difference between revisions)
| (One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Let's just put these all on one big page. I don't see a reason for having 24 one or two sentence pages instead of just one big page with all of them listed. [[User:Ross Taben|Ross Taben]] 15:30, 1 April 2006 (EST) | Let's just put these all on one big page. I don't see a reason for having 24 one or two sentence pages instead of just one big page with all of them listed. [[User:Ross Taben|Ross Taben]] 15:30, 1 April 2006 (EST) | ||
:I'm not opposed to that. The finished page'd be big, but not cripplingly so - it's just text. - [[User:Chris|Chris]] 15:39, 1 April 2006 (EST) | :I'm not opposed to that. The finished page'd be big, but not cripplingly so - it's just text. - [[User:Chris|Chris]] 15:39, 1 April 2006 (EST) | ||
| + | ::Unless I misunderstand how things work, I would think that if all grouped together it would be slightly smaller, memory wise, than it is now because there would be fewer files and links etc. Since there is a nice break between each order with a list and bold titles and other formatting gimmicks, it would be comparitavely light reading as well. [[User:Ross Taben|Ross Taben]] 15:42, 1 April 2006 (EST) | ||
| + | :::It'd be smaller tha numerous pages memory-wise yes. I was thinking about its loading size for display i.e. it's not going to take five minutes to show up in the window. - [[User:Chris|Chris]] 15:51, 1 April 2006 (EST) | ||
Latest revision as of 20:51, 1 April 2006
Let's just put these all on one big page. I don't see a reason for having 24 one or two sentence pages instead of just one big page with all of them listed. Ross Taben 15:30, 1 April 2006 (EST)
- I'm not opposed to that. The finished page'd be big, but not cripplingly so - it's just text. - Chris 15:39, 1 April 2006 (EST)
- Unless I misunderstand how things work, I would think that if all grouped together it would be slightly smaller, memory wise, than it is now because there would be fewer files and links etc. Since there is a nice break between each order with a list and bold titles and other formatting gimmicks, it would be comparitavely light reading as well. Ross Taben 15:42, 1 April 2006 (EST)
- It'd be smaller tha numerous pages memory-wise yes. I was thinking about its loading size for display i.e. it's not going to take five minutes to show up in the window. - Chris 15:51, 1 April 2006 (EST)
- Unless I misunderstand how things work, I would think that if all grouped together it would be slightly smaller, memory wise, than it is now because there would be fewer files and links etc. Since there is a nice break between each order with a list and bold titles and other formatting gimmicks, it would be comparitavely light reading as well. Ross Taben 15:42, 1 April 2006 (EST)