Template talk:Planes of the Multiverse

Planechase split

Curious as to the thought process behind splitting out the planes that have been seen in Planechase. Is the goal to highlight those planes as ones that may actually have some world-building and are thus plausible targets for a future set (unlike the "Other planes" list, which is a collection of planes known only by off-hand mentions)? While I don't disagree with the possibility of sorting the planes this way, what does it accomplish for the reader of the wiki? What meaningfully separates those planes from those in the "Other settings" list? Is there a better label for either "Other planes" or "Other settings" to reduce the confusion between those labels? I don't want to revert without offering a chance to talk, but this change doesn't seem like a good idea to me. --Corveroth (talk) 01:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, in my last edition, I had the goal to highlight one planes from the others. I don't see bad having several labels... Why not? With a simple view, now you see from the bunch of not common planes those which have been pictured on Planechase and those which are only off-hand mentions. That distinction is useful for a lot of people? I don't know. Is useful for me and a few vorthoses? May be. And yes, if you know a better/clearer name for those labels, feel free to put those names. --Tuamir (talk) 07:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

"Planechase-only" seems like a terrible label choice. For once no less than 11 of those planes are directly or indirectly referred elsewhere in the Magic canon, some on actual cards! Not to mention that two of them (Arkhos and Mongseng) were renamed into the settings of later blocks (Theros and Tarkir, respectively). Circeus (talk) 05:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I personally don't feel like Planechase stardom is enough to warrant a split, but I'll play along for the time being. I've rearranged the table a bit to reflect the apparent logic: "places we've been in a block", "places Creative gave a tentative okay to", "other places that might plausibly be used", "other planes and plane-related accessories". --Corveroth (talk) 22:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Care to explain the revert? --Corveroth (talk) 16:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but your edition was a bit chaotic, messing with the order, as putting planes like Shandalar, Fiora and such as less important planes as the others in Planechase. Let me explain, there is an order of inclusion in the classification, like "Block planes" ⊆ "Set planes" ⊆ "Planechase planes" ⊆ "All planes", and I think that order needs to be maintained independently of the number of labels and their names. --Tuamir (talk) 15:17, 7 September 2015 (UTC)