Talk:GTF Loki

Are ship intros a good / bad thing. I've noticed many of them are horribly written --Monitor 20:56, 27 March 2008 (CST)

I agree. Almost all of them are both ungrammatical and present no useful information that isn't given elsewhere. I just don't care about it enough to remove them, although I'd support anyone who actually went through our zillion ship articles and removed or at least fixed the intros. Mustang19 07:34, 28 March 2008 (CST)

I think they might be useful as a digested form of the rest of the article. The danger is that they become too much like the Veteran Comments section. Indisputable information would obviously be pertinent. --Monitor 21:54, 28 March 2008 (CST)

I wrote many introductory paragraphs. They are very useful to give a quick summary about the ship in question. This is the way every sensible wiki does it: a quick intro that gives the most useful and general information and the rest is about details. Are they horribly written and not factual enough? Your versions are more subjective than mine were, and horribly written? You know, I know the difference between "it's" and "its," which is like second grade, elementary school. - TopAce 11:45, 31 March 2008 (CST)

I'm sorry, I gave them all pretty much equal treatment. I was speaking of intros such as the original one for the Fenris " -

GTC Fenris cruisers were the predecessors of the GTC Leviathan-class of cruisers and were primarily used during the 14-Year War and the Great War. However, many were equipped with beam technology and saw engagement during the Second Shivan Incursion. Fenris cruisers equal the GVC Aten in terms of efficiency; however, the Aten was not equipped with modern beam and flak technology after the Great War's conclusion. The GTC Orff and the NTC Trinity were two notable Fenris cruisers."

This obviously goes against canon sources several times. Yours were good; feel free to revert them.--Monitor 10:52, 1 April 2008 (CST)