Talk:Deus Ex mods

message: Yo, this page shouldn't exist because it is a list of modifications for a video game. Hope this helps.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.145.18.192 (talk) 18:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 2010 

message: The bottom half of this article seems to be advertisement for various Deus Ex mods, with no notability asserted. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The mod list was assembled from the most frequented mod pages (for in-progress mods) and most downloaded mods from various sources, (Fileplanet is a good example of just such a site) as well as frequently mentioned mods on a number of modding community sites.  -- Y|yukichigai 23:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There really needs to be more said about each mod, because, right now, one or two sentences and a link is indistinguishable from advertisement. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anything I would think that more than a few sentances would sound like an advertisement.  Then again, no harm in trying it out to see what it looks like. -- Y|yukichigai 00:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement

message: I'm curious as to the detailed reasoning behind the removal of all links in this article, as well as the removal of the mouseover template.  The former, well, I'm sure we'll spend hours debating that, but the latter truly confuses me.  What is wrong with mouseover information? -- Y|yukichigai 03:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mouseover links are non-standard and look like those annoying advertising links. That said, there's no real reason the standard is in place that I can see, and the appearance is strictly an aesthetic call. I have no strong feelings either way. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of links and mouseover template 

message: What, exactly, does this mouseover thing do that it needs to be there?  What purpose does it serve?  I've never seen it used on any other article, and I don't see why it needs to be on this one.  All it does is hide information that's supposedly supposed to be part of the article, which, notably, wouldn't show up in printed form.  So, can someone explain why it shouldn't be edited out, or at least rewritten so that the content is actually visible?  Errick 01:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The content is visible, at least if someone cares to view it.  The mouseover template allows for relevant though somewhat minor information to be retained in an article without detracting from the overall flow of the article.  It doesn't *need* to be used, but Wikipedia doesn't *need* to exist either.  Just leave it alone; it's serving its purpose adequately and effectively. -- Y|yukichigai (ramble argue check) 11:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  If the information is important enough to be included in the article, it should be in the main article text where it is visible to everyone.  By putting it in a mouseover, particularly in a manner as such that I've never seen used on any other article, some people will never see it.  Also, it won't show up in print form, which is one of the stated goals of Wikipedia, so even though you technically can do it, that doesn't mean you should.  In a similar vein, I rather suspect most screen-readers won't read the mouseover, though I can't say 100% about that since I've never used one myself.  I guess the main thing I'm trying to say is, if it sohuld be in the article, it should be in the body of the article and not hidden.  And if it's not important enough to be readily visible, then it really shouldn't be there at all. Errick 18:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Okay, so as not to keep revert warring 

message: Talk:Deus_Ex#Proposed_merge_with_Deus_Ex_mods, for posterity.  added to article July 4th. czar ♔ 17:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge