Template talk:Compet-n

Ordering
which, presumably, is the order in which they were added to the roster  &mdash;  At the risk of starting another argument  :>  no:


 * The first five launched together, 2001-03-25, in response to a poll .  Gez's revision retains AdamH's sequence, which I hadn't noticed until today.
 * AV arrived as of 2003-01-08.
 * Scythe, IIRC, was added much later and not without controversy. vdgg never included it on the Big Spreadsheet[tm], but so many people were recording in strict vanilla   that that choice was assumed to constitute lobbying for its inclusion.  fx02 finally announced it in 2015 , but during the years when no website existed to update, the consensus among DWF proctors (stated or unstated) was final and arguably could have taken effect earlier.

That said, if the reader didn't know the timeline or thought it irrelevant to modern community activity, would they possibly find publication order more intuitive (matching the IWAD list), or even alphabetical order? This is me not reverting you, just pointing out we may have options. :> HTH / KUTGW. Ryan W (living fossil) 06:44, 17 June 2020 (CDT)


 * Thanks for the history lesson. :) Then wad ids were assigned later and not in chronological order, and I'm fine with reverting the template (same order as in the Compet-n intro, in fact). I'd use the same order in the category record tables. Unless someone, anno 2020, insist on alphabetical order? --Xymph (talk) 07:29, 17 June 2020 (CDT)