Talk:Tutor: Difference between revisions
>Uber mexico695@legacy41915746 No edit summary |
>LegacymtgsalvationUser1033 No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
What do you think now? It's a lot less cluttered this way, AND they're grouped properly [[User:Uber mexico|Uber mexico]] 15:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC) | What do you think now? It's a lot less cluttered this way, AND they're grouped properly [[User:Uber mexico|Uber mexico]] 15:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
:Good job sorting - looks better. --[[User:GeoMike|GeoMike]] 16:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:21, 20 July 2007
Green Creature should be Level 3 heading - a subheading under Creature, which is a Level 2 heading. --GeoMike 14:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Dissagree, why isn't multicolored card a subset of card. Why isn't blue instant a level 3 of instant which is a level 2? Uber mexico 14:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Of for that matter, why aren't all of them level 3s of "any card"'s level 2? Uber mexico 14:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- We could make Blue Instant a subset of Instant. I didn't notice that until you just mentioned it. --GeoMike 15:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
The problem is, once you start making subsets like that, you get cluttered. Where would instant OR creature with flash be classifed. It should be 2 differant subsets. But then it's cluttered already so what do you do? I think it would be nice if we could sort them a little better. Just so they're grouped. But I don't think we should have a whole list of varying things and then have a whole 3 of them be subsets. Just because it exists inside another group does not automatically make it a subset. It may end up looking a lot less cluttered to make them ALL level 3s. Uber mexico 15:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
What do you think now? It's a lot less cluttered this way, AND they're grouped properly Uber mexico 15:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
- Good job sorting - looks better. --GeoMike 16:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)