Talk:D'hin'ni

Removal of cleanup templates
I note that certain cleanup templates have been removed without cleanup being effected or any reasonable justification being provided. I would be grateful if they could be restore so that editors who are in a position to carry out cleanup will be alerted to those sections where it is need. --Gavin Collins (talk) 09:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * who tags were in multiple places where the sentence either clearly said who was involved or where there wasn't a person in it; such tags make no sense. For example, "Their favorite class is the sorcererWho)." was a sentence. The "their" refers to the d'hin'ni, as should be obvious from the rest of the paragraph, and "sorcerer" is not a person. Additionally, the sheer number of who tags made the article difficult to read. I have removed the tags so that it is easier to read and because many of them did not make sense. If you wish, you may restore the template, which effectively negates the need for in-line who tags. -Drilnoth (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Where a statement is made without attribution, such as "Their favorite class is the sorcerer", it is not clear who is making this statement: is the game authors, or perhaps some fictional observer in the game? I recomend restoring the cleanup templates if you are not going to make any improvements to the article, so that other editors will be aware of these problems. --Gavin Collins (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Here is the exact text of the template documentation:"This tag is for placement after descriptions of a group of persons, such as 'serious scholars / scientists / researchers,' 'historians / philosophers / scientists,' 'some / many people,' and the like."


 * "Use it when no specific examples of identifiable individuals from that group are named who could be used to verify the statements or beliefs attributed to the group. Preferably the offending statement should be made more specific by identifying particular individuals and then either cited or tagged for needing citation. Similarly, the statement should be deleted if the claim about the group is sufficiently vague as to be unsupportable."


 * Now can you see that the tag is inappropriate? According to your definition, millions of those tags would have to be placed; not everything in every article is sourced, and the who tag has nothing to do with sourcing. -Drilnoth (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Clearly there is no specific examples of identifiable individuals used in the statements I have used the template on. Surely it is not obvoious to you that a claim such as "Their favorite class is the sorcerer" is sufficiently vague as to be unsupportable? --Gavin Collins (talk) 14:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently it is not obvious. Also, if you think that it is "sufficiently vague to be unsupportable", then wouldn't the vague tag make more sense than who? -Drilnoth (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)