Cunnan talk:Lochac-centrism: Difference between revisions
From Cunnan
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Adding suggestions for regional bias hotlist) |
JakeVortex (talk | contribs) (How about "Regional Point of View"?) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Hmmm, should we limit ourselves to Lochac centrism? It possible that at some point we will have to deal with info specific to other kingdoms. Is a more general notice needed? - [[User:Tobin|Tobin]] 15:51, 1 Jan 2004 (EST) |
Hmmm, should we limit ourselves to Lochac centrism? It possible that at some point we will have to deal with info specific to other kingdoms. Is a more general notice needed? - [[User:Tobin|Tobin]] 15:51, 1 Jan 2004 (EST) |
||
* Probably, but what should we call it? "Regionality"? "Parochiality"? "Internationalisation"? [[User:Morgant|Morgant]] |
* Probably, but what should we call it? "Regionality"? "Parochiality"? "Internationalisation"? [[User:Morgant|Morgant]] |
||
** Good point. There are pages that should have a regional focus because of the subject matter (e.g., [[An Tir]]) there are others that have a limited scope because they were only written from that perspective. How about we call this '''regional point of view''' or '''RPOV'''? ~ [[User:JakeVortex|JakeVortex]] |
|||
Revision as of 03:21, 6 January 2004
Hmmm, should we limit ourselves to Lochac centrism? It possible that at some point we will have to deal with info specific to other kingdoms. Is a more general notice needed? - Tobin 15:51, 1 Jan 2004 (EST)
- Probably, but what should we call it? "Regionality"? "Parochiality"? "Internationalisation"? Morgant
- Good point. There are pages that should have a regional focus because of the subject matter (e.g., An Tir) there are others that have a limited scope because they were only written from that perspective. How about we call this regional point of view or RPOV? ~ JakeVortex
