Talk:Database:Planettypes:Trantor Class

jackSNo. No. No. And for what it's worth, it's "DATABASE". It is early, I am grumpy, and this hasn't helped.

lee: Indeed, thx, I've just noticed that and moved the page into the database. How comes that you don't like it? In which way isn't it helpful?

• jackS 00:56, 3 May 2005 (PDT)

Apologies for snapping a bit earlier, but what I'm not happy about with the description is this: it has precious little to do with anything in the VS universe. "Trantor class" (as the warning/caveat I posted on the wiki page with the dump of planet types clearly states) is (despite bugs which display the name to the user) a purely internal naming convention. It's nothing more than an easy way of reminding us which planet texture we needed (something that looked massively populated). It could just as easily have been termed "Coruscant class" - but that doesn't mean that Asimov, Seldon, or Jedi have any appropriate place in the description thereof. Nor do Trantor, Coruscant and their ilk have any place unless, for edifying reference for the uninitiated reader, you wished to populate a "see also" section with some links to wikipedia articles on planet-scale development throughout the history of science fiction.

In short, you wrote a very misleading description based upon a name that's eventually going to be completely hidden to the player about a planet whose fundamental natures are not yet entirely stable. I appreciate your enthusiasm for wanting to help flesh out the wiki, but, when researching what to put in a description of entities in the VS universe, one would be well advised to consult those familiar with the details of the VS universe in those cases where the potential exists for significant ambiguities.