FANDOM


  • ThisUserLikesOreo
    ThisUserLikesOreo closed this thread because:
    opposed
    20:38, January 6, 2018

    The current Basic Zombie pages (including Conehead, Buckethead, Brickhead, Blockhead's), really seem to be a mess being occupied by fifteen kinds of Zombies from thirteen Worlds. The whole pages are a mess and it's really not convinient for browsing informations about a certain kinds of Zombie. Should we split them into their respective varieties, in other words, all sub-species of a variety to be split and merged into separate pages? For example, all kinds of Mummy Zombies, including Pyramid-Head, and perhaps Flag and Rally, under a title of Mummy Zombie?

    Symbol thumbs upSupport
    Yes, so that it'll be a lot more convinient to check their gallery, trivia, levels of appearence, Almanac entry. Besides, distinct Zombie kinds like Jurassic Zombies, Pilot Zombies could be distinguished.


    Symbol thumbs downOppose
    No, as they, after all, are just the same Zombies into different costumes, even though it's inconvenient to read, they should be kept into the current pages


    Note: In order to be able to vote on mainspace related voting threads, you need at least 25 mainspace edits and you must have been on the wiki for two weeks. For any other topic, you must have been on the wiki for four weeks. If you do not follow these rules your vote will be disqualified. If you do it repeatedly, you will be given a forum warning. Thank you.
    To show your stance, please type {{Support|reason}}, {{Neutral|reason}}, or {{Oppose|reason}}. The reason must be stated behind the | in order to not be disqualified.
    Note: In order to be able to vote on mainspace related voting threads, you need at least 25 mainspace edits and you must have been on the wiki for two weeks. For any other topic, you must have been on the wiki for four weeks. If you do not follow these rules your vote will be disqualified. If you do it repeatedly, you will be given a forum warning. Thank you.
      Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs upSupport
      Making 16 zombies (after Steam Ages) go to only 4 or 6 is almost always a good thing, because yeah it's way too much in one page currently, it might be kinda weird for the generic PvZ1 ones but they shouldn't be exceptions
        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      It'd be more confusing to put all the different KINDS of zombies in the same page, even they're in the same world. Think about it - the description must be made for 3 kinds at once, while there will be tons of strategies as they're in different kinds - oh wait, they're just copypastas of the original. The trivia will still as confusing as usual, while they being different kinds just make things more confusing. I personally think the current one is fine: the infobox and trivia, even though it's the new one now, it only requires them to navigate in order to look for the correct zombie.


      When people search for these zombies, they search for the kind in general. With the search bar redirects them into the page itself, and the page only says things about the kind in general, it's kinda convenient for that already. And as I said, they only need to navigate for other kinds of stuff. On the other hand, yes, the gallery IS a mess, but the Table of Contents is there for a reason.


      But even though they can navigate, the page is still a bit long. However, I think it's better to split them followed by its kind, and whatever crap you wanna make as a group, for example, split the Basic Zombie pages into different pages for different game versions - one for PvZ1 and PvZ2, and one for PvZ2C and PvZO would still be OK for me (remember Plants (PvZ2) and Plants (PvZ2C)?)

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      Look, having multiple pages can most definitely be justified if the material between two subjects can support their own pages. The issue is that variants of the same core zombie will almost certainly end up repeating itself, especially with the minimum requirements to taking them out given their health pools and movements make them all functionally identical for the most part.


      Some could be separated if they are distinguished enough, but immunity to Freeze or dancing with a Pianist is not enough of a significant change in my opinion to justify a different page entirely for any of the variants. This is especially the case when variants are universally generic, such as Far Future Zombies to Ancient Egypt to Pirate Seas. Each of these and several other worlds are functionally identical, making the induction of 3 or more pages of the same strategy without harping too much on the world gimmick itself leads it to redundant content overall.


      If there were a choice to distinguish based on a certain quantity of factors that makes one zombie different than the other outside World-specific gimmicks (Slider Tiles, plank lanes, grave Stones, waves of water, etc.), then I'd be up for it to possibly sort out the page. However, as the concept stands, even for the concept of this page refers to zombies from World A,B,C,D, for other zombies, visit this redirect to like 5 different pages with minor changes, sounds arguably as a less appropriate alternative for the common viewer's pleasure.

        Loading editor
    • Also I'm kinda tired with the pitiful examples these votes provide for the opposing side to the arguement. "even though it's inconvienent to read"? Well, thanks Mr. Strawman for making my choice all the more equal!

      EDIT post vote: So the idea is that we take the funcitonally indifferent variants of Zombies and merge them with pages of zombies whom only share design rather than functional similarities like Health, movespeed and such? That'd be even more of a mess!

      Edit even more after the fact: How would a page even function? A Subsection for every zombie type? So at least FIVE subsections for every section like gallery, strategy and description? How would level of appearance be anything more than a mess of Encounters (Basic), Encounters (Conehead), etc?

        Loading editor
    • Sort-neutralNeutral
      I'm definitely fine with splitting them, since the pages are currently really long. However since they're quite well organised I don't think such a change is strictly necessary, even though I think it would be nice.
        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs upSupport
      One word: Piano. When Piano Zombie plays, all Cowboy zombies dance and switch lanes while all other Basic, Cone, Bucket and Blockhead zombies don't do a thing. Yet we group them in the same page. Gargantuar Prime is like a regular gargantuar but is not on the Gargantuar page because it's different. Same with Jurassic Gargantuar. Why don't we just do the same with regular zombies, Cones, Buckets and Blocks? Plus, the trivia page on those is a mess because it's always split between 13 different worlds! It's stupid, inefficient and incongruent not to split it.
        Loading editor
    • Sort-neutralNeutral
      I'm going to the neutral for this. Since it would basically be filled with tons of copypasta and crap, could literally be a super lazy wiki activities to help making articles. On the bright side, the page Zombie, Conehead Zombie, Buckethead Zombie and Brickhead Zombie is tedious af, it could be fixed with this, because those pages wouldn't gonna be as messy as before.

      Also, the cons for splitting these pages is that it's useless, because they have the same stats, same ability, same function and overall, they are just the same zombie but in different appearances. Sure, this will make the page less messier, but you don't need all of them, right? Except if they had different ability, like the way Normal Buckethead and Bonus Track ones like in PvZH. They had different abilities, stats and more. While PvZ2 basics, they have everything in common, they had the same stats, same ability, and serves the same purposes. There's no need of splitting.

        Loading editor
    • Teacup Terry wrote:
      Snip

      Maybe because Gargantuar Prime's most related traits with other gargantuars is speed, toughness and takes up the "Big hulking mini-boss" slot for the world, but is a seperate page because of the innumerous differences that would make a Strategy page basically two different entries between the average garg and the prime? (EMPeach, double-smash, laser beams off the top of my head)

      So now you have Pianos to change lanes in. That's one gimmick. I would need more difference than that to constitute a different strategy entry, a different page alltogether over a single alteration. Honestly, what can someone go on about without repeating other Basic Zombie strategies and having to put in maybe a single paragraph or two about how Pianists make them switch lanes? And given this validates one zombie's singularity, how would we split apart zombies that have no functional difference from eachother? Do we just have like 5 different pages of the same piece, or do we literally have to group some zombies together, but not others because of the single-most change in abilities?

      It may clear up the page as it is now, but why not seperate the other games first before we make pages about the same game's variants? The alteration between PvZ1 and 2 could see some different enough strategy pages and descriptions to make two separate pages both viable reads in their own right and not so selective as to interfere with a reader's enjoyment of the page.

        Loading editor
    • What about jurassic garg? There's one single difference which is more health. Sure, it's a large amount of extra health. But it's still one change and one change only. Yet we split it. And come on. Look at the below image. That's not optimal. That's not even acceptable. As members of the Plants Vs Zombies Wiki, we're supposed to make it easier for other users to understand. Not give them THAT! Splitting it will give at most 4 infobox layers per page,while this has almost 20!
      Screen Shot 2018-01-03 at 6.37.26 PM
        Loading editor
    • That's why Tabber exists. The older template with a tabber seems ok, and less tedious than the current one, tbh.

        Loading editor
    • Tabbers are no longer allowed to be used in infoboxes as Wikia stated to use the new infobox markup for all infoboxes now, so that it's readable and collapsible on mobile.

      Oh god, even though the infobox would be less confusing when split, I can't even imagine how confusing the descriptions would be. Just no. Split based on its kind or nothing.

      Jurassic Garg is different. That's a single split, and this? A split and THEN a MERGE of the basic trio of each world into a single page. Each of them all has completely different features, yet you put em in the same page. How's that gonna fix anything? Splitting stuff is ok, but reconsider where you merge things. I'd rather just separate Int with Chinese than THAT. At least there'd only be two game sections in the infobox now.

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      I think the way we have things merged is good enough personally. Buckets and coneheads should stay seperate.
        Loading editor
    • Teacup Terry wrote:
      What about jurassic garg? There's one single difference which is more health. Sure, it's a large amount of extra health. But it's still one change and one change only. Yet we split it. 

      Not true

      It is also slower.

      also,

      Symbol thumbs upSupport
      Because the page is so annoyingly long. Sure, they're basically the same thing in different costumes, but finding info on one of them can be annoying. There are different strategies in taking them down in different worlds.
        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      As others have said, not necessary. Sure it may be kind of crowded (and, occasionally, yes, confusing), but it's better this way than having a page for each variation of a basic and re-occurring form of zombie that (usually) only differs from the others of it's kind by visual appearance. There is no need to make an individual page for each variant. Special things about them (like reactions to Piano music, for example, or immunity to being frozen) can be put in the trivia specific for that variation. Also, everything is so nicely organized (if crowded) now, and it would be such an effort to do this.
        Loading editor
    • Teacup Terry wrote:
      As members of the Plants Vs Zombies Wiki, we're supposed to make it easier for other users to understand. Not give them THAT! Splitting it will give at most 4 infobox layers per page,while this has almost 20!

      And as a different member of the wikia, this change flies in the face of keeping each article different and minimalizing unneeded repetition so the user can learn new information more than relearning old info from other prior pages.

      With the proposed change, we will have six zombies per page, each with at least one or more major differences, in health speed with Rally and quantity in their respective worlds. Is it really a better option to make articles detailing how to combat Ancien Egypt zombies and their many different forms in a single page than to combat Bucketheads in general? Given how many common weaknesses Bucketheads have, on top the equal toughness and speed in isolation, writing about them in a general scense saves bytes and saves the time of the reader wanting to understand how to combat a functional type of zombie.

      Remember, the original vote is the seperation and remerging of basic variants to a single page. Basic, Conehead, Buckethead, Blockhead, Flag and Rally in a single page, what could go wrong? Other than having the Strategy literally just the same material repeated throughout 20~21 pages and each blurb on a seperate zombie to repeat the same material in each iteration.

      Until the vote is altered to not make the strategy section a disaster, the simple act of splitting 6 pages into 120 pages (126 if Pompador/Binkni split) is just not healthy. If you can explain how we can make quality articles out of literal straws from the same piece of content with either minor functional difference or literally no functional difference from other variants, I'm going to say this is a terrible idea.

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      The zombie variants are cosmetic appearances. When boiled down, they are the same enemy. So splitting them up will probably create a bunch of article stubs.
        Loading editor
    • Phantom of Ra wrote: Tabbers are no longer allowed to be used in infoboxes as Wikia stated to use the new infobox markup for all infoboxes now, so that it's readable and collapsible on mobile.

      Oh god, even though the infobox would be less confusing when split, I can't even imagine how confusing the descriptions would be. Just no. Split based on its kind or nothing.

      Jurassic Garg is different. That's a single split, and this? A split and THEN a MERGE of the basic trio of each world into a single page. Each of them all has completely different features, yet you put em in the same page. How's that gonna fix anything? Splitting stuff is ok, but reconsider where you merge things. I'd rather just separate Int with Chinese than THAT. At least there'd only be two game sections in the infobox now.

      This is why I hate Wikia since they made the change to Fandom. They try to rely on the mobile experience, and even then it is still user unfriendly. I would be better browsing Fandom on Windows Vista RTM instead of mobile.

      Sort-neutralNeutral
      Really it will create an edit farm and a mess but then stuff like Jurassic Gargantuars are split.
        Loading editor
    • BF10 wrote:

      Phantom of Ra wrote: Tabbers are no longer allowed to be used in infoboxes as Wikia stated to use the new infobox markup for all infoboxes now, so that it's readable and collapsible on mobile.

      Oh god, even though the infobox would be less confusing when split, I can't even imagine how confusing the descriptions would be. Just no. Split based on its kind or nothing.

      Jurassic Garg is different. That's a single split, and this? A split and THEN a MERGE of the basic trio of each world into a single page. Each of them all has completely different features, yet you put em in the same page. How's that gonna fix anything? Splitting stuff is ok, but reconsider where you merge things. I'd rather just separate Int with Chinese than THAT. At least there'd only be two game sections in the infobox now.

      This is why I hate Wikia since they made the change to Fandom. They try to rely on the mobile experience, and even then it is still user unfriendly. I would be better browsing Fandom on Windows Vista RTM instead of mobile.

      Sort-neutralNeutral
      Really it will create an edit farm and a mess but then stuff like Jurassic Gargantuars are split.

      Creating edit farms aren't necessarily bad if it is necessary to edit something a lot. Also, didn't you leave?

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      The rules state that if a zombie or plant doesn't have more than 3 differences, they stay together on a page, and if they have 3+ they split. The variants (except Jurassic, Cowboy (sort of), Peasant (once again, sort of), and Frostbite) are all the same and have nothing added to them, thus shouldn't be split.

      Of course, this is just following this current rule system we have for splitting, and it has been broken by plants.

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      Those Zombie variants stated have little to no difference. When you think about it, they're basically the same enemies with different visual appearances, that's all. You can just state the gameplay differences somewhere else, as separating them isn't necessary overall.
        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs upSupport
      But only with the variants to be different without the need of another zombie (example, by the stated monks, kongfu, cavemen, pilots and jurassics variants would be merged but cowboys and peasants not as they need pianists and kings to be different from others) although they doesn't have enough differences to be split following the main rules.
        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      The only variants with any form of gameplay difference are Cowboys and Jurassics, and even then, they're minor. Cowboys are for Piano and Jurassics are for Pterodactyl...that's it. Take those two away from the equation, and they're identical to every other variant. Not like they have huge health and speed differences like Jurassic Garg or Imp.
        Loading editor
    • ShroomstagramUser wrote:

      Symbol thumbs downOppose
      The only variants with any form of gameplay difference are Cowboys and Jurassics, and even then, they're minor. Cowboys are for Piano and Jurassics are for Pterodactyl...that's it. Take those two away from the equation, and they're identical to every other variant. Not like they have huge health and speed differences like Jurassic Garg or Imp.

      You forgot that the Cave Zombie and it's variants are immune to being frozen, they can only be chilled...

        Loading editor
    • BonkyChoiSE wrote:

      Symbol thumbs upSupport
      But only with the variants to be different without the need of another zombie (example, by the stated monks, kongfu, cavemen, pilots and jurassics variants would be merged but cowboys and peasants not as they need pianists and kings to be different from others) although they doesn't have enough differences to be split following the main rules.

      I don't think that that is an option here. You either Support them all having their own page, or Oppose and keep them all together.

        Loading editor
    • Zombiecrab wrote:

      ShroomstagramUser wrote:

      Symbol thumbs downOppose
      The only variants with any form of gameplay difference are Cowboys and Jurassics, and even then, they're minor. Cowboys are for Piano and Jurassics are for Pterodactyl...that's it. Take those two away from the equation, and they're identical to every other variant. Not like they have huge health and speed differences like Jurassic Garg or Imp.
      You forgot that the Cave Zombie and it's variants are immune to being frozen, they can only be chilled...

      Those, too, but that's a trait all Frostbite Caves zombies share.

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      Some basic zombies are slightly different to others, but it's usually a very small difference. This will also be cluttering, especially since most basic zombies are the same.
        Loading editor
    • Someone456
      Someone456 removed this reply because:
      Invalid reason
      11:54, January 4, 2018
      This reply has been removed
    • Sort-neutralNeutral
      If they're unique (like flying zombies and Jurassic Imp), then sure, but if not then stop it, get some help.
        Loading editor
    • MNikoKasah wrote:
      Symbol thumbs upSupport
      is kongfu zombies is only in china?

      Sorry, not a valid reason

      Plants-Vs-ZombiesDisqualified vote
        Loading editor
    • These are a list of the special things about certain basic zombies.

      Basic Modern Day/Player's House Zombies- Nothing special

      Ancient Egypt zombies- Can appear in sandstorms.

      Pirate Seas zombies- Nothing special.

      Wild West zombies- Piano affects them.

      Far Future Zombies- Nothing special.

      Frostbite Caves zombies- Immune to freezing, can only be chilled.

      Lost City zombies- Can be carried by bugs.

      Dark Ages zombies- Can be Knighted by Zombie King.

      Neon Mixtape Tour Zombies- Movement affected by jams (yes, not just MC, Glitter, Punk, Breakdancer and Arcade are affected.)

      Big Wave Beach zombies- Nothing special (that I remember off the top of my head.)

      Jurassic Marsh zombies- Can be carried by pterodactyls.

      A lot of opposers are claiming that all the pages would just be the same and there'd be so much copy pasting it would be redundant. But as you can see from the differences above, there are 3 zombies in the international version that have nothing special about them. That's not even counting Sky City zombies' ability to fly, or Kongfu World zombies' ability to pick up stuff from weapon stands. Simply put, merging these all into one is like merging all the Peashooters from Garden Warfare into one page. They may all be Peashooters, but they are very different.

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      Yup. The infobox is quite long. However, apart from that, I don't see enough problems to split them.

      Imagine what the pages look like if we split them. They will be relatively short and duplicate pages. Health is the same. Strategies are similar.

      The best way is to organize those minor differences (affected by jam, immune to be frozen) to make the page look cleaner. They can be simply listed History/Strategies sections. I don't think those extra sentences require more similar pages.

        Loading editor
    • Teacup Terry wrote:
      These are a list of the special things about certain basic zombies.

      ...
      Ancient Egypt zombies- Can appear in sandstorms.
      ...

      Lost City zombies- Can be carried by bugs.
      Neon Mixtape Tour Zombies- Movement affected by jams
      ...Simply put, merging these all into one is like merging all the Peashooters from Garden Warfare into one page. They may all be Peashooters, but they are very different.

      Because having a Peashooter's peas apply different effects, increase or decrease stats to change the gameplay significantly is comparable to saying "The world's gimmick makes them special!". What you may be hyperbolically implying is that the slightest "difference" makes it justifiable to split the pages apart. PvZ:GW variants are so extremely variant in their capabilities that a new synopsis was required, as well as providing a large quantity of content in how their alterations actually altered gameplay. A healthy article made because a merged page would have required many individual segments for each iteration, of which the PvZ2 variants can easily be grouped together by similarity and are individually short in size.

      Great, AE has sandstorms and has the common weaknesses of all the other basic variants. But is it truly fair to say that's a feature the zombies themselves have, or just a gimmick of the world affecting the zombie itself? Well by the same extent, Gargantuars may as well be split because AE variants ALSO have the "ability" to be sandstormed in.

      Matter of fact, as shown by the Gargantuar/Iceberg+Kernal-Pult Pinata Party, sandstorms do not discriminate by Gargantuar timezone. So by extension, saying AE has a gimmick that validates a unique character seems whole fallacious. It is a gimmick of the world that applies to every zombie inside, saying it's a difference should be reserved to the world's pages. Proof: http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/File:Pinata_2_03_17

      At best we can wring out one paragraph for world differences. That isn't enough. Unless we state what is effective to combat them in general and lead to inevitable repetition, which was far more simple when they are grouped in a single page.

      Why would anyone want to read up 10+ pages if all they want to know is to combat bucketheads in a general sense? And if there is a split, how many times would we have to mention Magnet-Shroom as a weakness? Do we seriously have to repeat that piece of information 10+ times, and do we really have to get to a point where the alternative is to neglect information on any page? That's the crux of the issue, splitting these pages apart hampers user iteration substantially since the core mechanics are too similar to justify separation, and splitting the strategies for each "variant" either leaves some information exclusive to some pages and requiting to serf every one of them just to have the same effect as one page or have a bunch of repeating and unrelated content from other pages and the proposed merging which makes readers trying to look into a specific zombie type have much more to trudge through.

        Loading editor
    • Symbol thumbs downOppose
      They are just basic zombies.Not a bit of difference.Seperating them is pointless Even they have differences , a special mark is more than enough.
        Loading editor
    • Legofan9o5 wrote:

      Because having a Peashooter's peas apply different effects, increase or decrease stats to change the gameplay significantly is comparable to saying "The world's gimmick makes them special!". What you may be hyperbolically implying is that the slightest "difference" makes it justifiable to split the pages apart. PvZ:GW variants are so extremely variant in their capabilities that a new synopsis was required, as well as providing a large quantity of content in how their alterations actually altered gameplay. A healthy article made because a merged page would have required many individual segments for each iteration, of which the PvZ2 variants can easily be grouped together by similarity and are individually short in size.

      Great, AE has sandstorms and has the common weaknesses of all the other basic variants. But is it truly fair to say that's a feature the zombies themselves have, or just a gimmick of the world affecting the zombie itself? Well by the same extent, Gargantuars may as well be split because AE variants ALSO have the "ability" to be sandstormed in.

      Matter of fact, as shown by the Gargantuar/Iceberg+Kernal-Pult Pinata Party, sandstorms do not discriminate by Gargantuar timezone. So by extension, saying AE has a gimmick that validates a unique character seems whole fallacious. It is a gimmick of the world that applies to every zombie inside, saying it's a difference should be reserved to the world's pages. Proof: http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/File:Pinata_2_03_17

      At best we can wring out one paragraph for world differences. That isn't enough. Unless we state what is effective to combat them in general and lead to inevitable repetition, which was far more simple when they are grouped in a single page.

      Why would anyone want to read up 10+ pages if all they want to know is to combat bucketheads in a general sense? And if there is a split, how many times would we have to mention Magnet-Shroom as a weakness? Do we seriously have to repeat that piece of information 10+ times, and do we really have to get to a point where the alternative is to neglect information on any page? That's the crux of the issue, splitting these pages apart hampers user iteration substantially since the core mechanics are too similar to justify separation, and splitting the strategies for each "variant" either leaves some information exclusive to some pages and requiting to serf every one of them just to have the same effect as one page or have a bunch of repeating and unrelated content from other pages and the proposed merging which makes readers trying to look into a specific zombie type have much more to trudge through.

      You forgot one thing: Supporting this would also mean merging 5 zombies with completely different features into one page (except that they're in the same world, and that's it. Weaknesses, health, strategies, origins, sounds, sprites, etc. are ALL different, which would make the page confusing as hell)

        Loading editor
    • Phantom of Ra wrote:


      Because having a Peashooter's peas apply different effects, increase or decrease stats to change the gameplay significantly is comparable to saying "The world's gimmick makes them special!". What you may be hyperbolically implying is that the slightest "difference" makes it justifiable to split the pages apart. PvZ:GW variants are so extremely variant in their capabilities that a new synopsis was required, as well as providing a large quantity of content in how their alterations actually altered gameplay. A healthy article made because a merged page would have required many individual segments for each iteration, of which the PvZ2 variants can easily be grouped together by similarity and are individually short in size.

      Great, AE has sandstorms and has the common weaknesses of all the other basic variants. But is it truly fair to say that's a feature the zombies themselves have, or just a gimmick of the world affecting the zombie itself? Well by the same extent, Gargantuars may as well be split because AE variants ALSO have the "ability" to be sandstormed in.

      Matter of fact, as shown by the Gargantuar/Iceberg+Kernal-Pult Pinata Party, sandstorms do not discriminate by Gargantuar timezone. So by extension, saying AE has a gimmick that validates a unique character seems whole fallacious. It is a gimmick of the world that applies to every zombie inside, saying it's a difference should be reserved to the world's pages. Proof: http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/File:Pinata_2_03_17

      At best we can wring out one paragraph for world differences. That isn't enough. Unless we state what is effective to combat them in general and lead to inevitable repetition, which was far more simple when they are grouped in a single page.

      Why would anyone want to read up 10+ pages if all they want to know is to combat bucketheads in a general sense? And if there is a split, how many times would we have to mention Magnet-Shroom as a weakness? Do we seriously have to repeat that piece of information 10+ times, and do we really have to get to a point where the alternative is to neglect information on any page? That's the crux of the issue, splitting these pages apart hampers user iteration substantially since the core mechanics are too similar to justify separation, and splitting the strategies for each "variant" either leaves some information exclusive to some pages and requiting to serf every one of them just to have the same effect as one page or have a bunch of repeating and unrelated content from other pages and the proposed merging which makes readers trying to look into a specific zombie type have much more to trudge through.

      You forgot one thing: Supporting this would also mean merging 5 zombies with completely different features into one page (except that they're in the same world, and that's it. Weaknesses, health, strategies, origins, sounds, sprites, etc. are ALL different, which would make the page confusing as hell)

      I didn't forget?

      That's what I was refering to in the last paragraph as "unrelated content". Also 5? Technically it would be six (Basic, Cone, Bucket, Block, Rally and Flag) in a single page, so what you said plus one more. And for the explicit record, I don't want to see that as much as anyone else. ;P

      Trust me, I was aware of the merge based on pure cosmetic relation rather than funciton. If I wasn't, I'd be sticking to my arguement of 120+ pages from the original 6. Hence, the 10+ pages guestimate in its place for each world of PvZ2.

        Loading editor
    • Sort-neutralNeutral
      The plus is that all basic variants can be merged and therefore the split-merge rule won't be a problem with the armor3 variants (Knight, Blockhead, Fossilhead; contrast the Veteran armor4 variants). The minus is that we'll have a whole bunch of different pages repeating themselves over and over. Also, I'm pretty sure Basic, Brickhead, and Rally variants have very different strategies.
        Loading editor
    • Legofan9o5 wrote: Technically it would be six (Basic, Cone, Bucket, Block, Rally and Flag) in a single page, so what you said plus one more..

      In some cases, 7: Basic, Conehead, Buckethead, Knight/Blockhead/Fossilhead, Brickhead, Flag, and Rally.

        Loading editor
    • I think Jurassic Fossilhead should stay as its own since it's got 99 HP, meaning it doesn't die to insta-kills. That could be a little redundant though

        Loading editor
    • Sort-neutralNeutral
      I'm fine with the pages changing, but I'm also fine with them as is.
        Loading editor
    • Legofan9o5 wrote:
      Phantom of Ra wrote:


      Because having a Peashooter's peas apply different effects, increase or decrease stats to change the gameplay significantly is comparable to saying "The world's gimmick makes them special!". What you may be hyperbolically implying is that the slightest "difference" makes it justifiable to split the pages apart. PvZ:GW variants are so extremely variant in their capabilities that a new synopsis was required, as well as providing a large quantity of content in how their alterations actually altered gameplay. A healthy article made because a merged page would have required many individual segments for each iteration, of which the PvZ2 variants can easily be grouped together by similarity and are individually short in size.

      Great, AE has sandstorms and has the common weaknesses of all the other basic variants. But is it truly fair to say that's a feature the zombies themselves have, or just a gimmick of the world affecting the zombie itself? Well by the same extent, Gargantuars may as well be split because AE variants ALSO have the "ability" to be sandstormed in.

      Matter of fact, as shown by the Gargantuar/Iceberg+Kernal-Pult Pinata Party, sandstorms do not discriminate by Gargantuar timezone. So by extension, saying AE has a gimmick that validates a unique character seems whole fallacious. It is a gimmick of the world that applies to every zombie inside, saying it's a difference should be reserved to the world's pages. Proof: http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/File:Pinata_2_03_17

      At best we can wring out one paragraph for world differences. That isn't enough. Unless we state what is effective to combat them in general and lead to inevitable repetition, which was far more simple when they are grouped in a single page.

      Why would anyone want to read up 10+ pages if all they want to know is to combat bucketheads in a general sense? And if there is a split, how many times would we have to mention Magnet-Shroom as a weakness? Do we seriously have to repeat that piece of information 10+ times, and do we really have to get to a point where the alternative is to neglect information on any page? That's the crux of the issue, splitting these pages apart hampers user iteration substantially since the core mechanics are too similar to justify separation, and splitting the strategies for each "variant" either leaves some information exclusive to some pages and requiting to serf every one of them just to have the same effect as one page or have a bunch of repeating and unrelated content from other pages and the proposed merging which makes readers trying to look into a specific zombie type have much more to trudge through.

      You forgot one thing: Supporting this would also mean merging 5 zombies with completely different features into one page (except that they're in the same world, and that's it. Weaknesses, health, strategies, origins, sounds, sprites, etc. are ALL different, which would make the page confusing as hell)
      I didn't forget?

      That's what I was refering to in the last paragraph as "unrelated content". Also 5? Technically it would be six (Basic, Cone, Bucket, Block, Rally and Flag) in a single page, so what you said plus one more. And for the explicit record, I don't want to see that as much as anyone else. ;P

      Trust me, I was aware of the merge based on pure cosmetic relation rather than funciton. If I wasn't, I'd be sticking to my arguement of 120+ pages from the original 6. Hence, the 10+ pages guestimate in its place for each world of PvZ2.

      Heck you didn't say it detailed.

        Loading editor
    • Jel-LOL FTW wrote:
      I think Jurassic Fossilhead should stay as its own since it's got 99 HP, meaning it doesn't die to insta-kills. That could be a little redundant though

      Ones currently on their current pages will not be affected.

        Loading editor
    • Neutral!

        Loading editor
    • I think those machined health ones that were added minecart,amberhead, blockhead,etc

      should count as basic zombies because after their protection is destroyed they turn into a normal zombie.

        Loading editor
    • Professor Sun wrote: Neutral!

      You mean {{Neutral}}, to make this:

      Sort-neutralNeutral
        Loading editor
    • ok

      Sort-neutralNeutral
        Loading editor
    • Professor Sun
      Professor Sun removed this reply because:
      dunno
      20:38, January 6, 2018
      This reply has been removed
    • gg

        Loading editor
    • Opposes win.

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message