This is the talk page for discussing the page, Monster World Area.
Please try to
Counts as an Archetype?
How is this an Archetype? It's just a group of cards with a vaguely common trait. Isn't this just like saying something like hat wearing monsters is considered an Archetype? -- Deltaneos (talk) 18:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am not sure who added the archetype category but i would agree with you. But this can be removed from the archetype category since the first sentence states it's rather just a series of cards that are similar.--Moneypony 22:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- The backfire of this though is that we won't be able to use a archetype navbox but should we convert it to text?--Moneypony 00:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that it's a "series" and that that's a different concept than "Archetype". "Clowns" can be identified by having "Clown" in their name and have similar/related effects making them an Archetype. Yokai, I think, was a Monster Type like Spirit and Union, when they appeared in the Japanese manga. But yes, cards bearing the Eye of Wdjat or female cards is trivial information, not a series/Archetype. I wouldn't say this needs an Archetype navbox. We should list the various worlds in the card game and maybe write a paragraph about them and give a link to their associated Archetype. -- Deltaneos (talk) 08:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- The locations of the cards aren't necessarily a "spirit world".--Moneypony 22:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- I only know the Ancient Forest is but most of the others aren't so it would be better to keep it separate IMO.--Moneypony 01:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Converting it to text
I think the best way to handle this would be to convert this into text, I wouldn't mind doing it but i need some OKs from people so they don't revert it.--Moneypony 19:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
What exactly is this?
If I understand this right a Monster World Area is just any card which can stay on the field after its been activated, whose artwork depicts a location? I know there was already a bit of debate about this, but is that really enough to make it an archetype? Is this in any way more valid than saying people is an archetype and any card depicted as a person in the artwork is part of the archetype? -- Deltaneos (talk) 13:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I think this started out with good intentions, but evidently something got lost and ppl just started posting any card that vaguely resembled a world into it. The type is called "FIELD" card for a reason people! I think this page should be deleted, or at least cleaned to only cards that are obviously parts of the world, like Ancient Forest and Rainbow Ruins. Deathhacker 02:10, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
- I also support the deletion of this page. It's clearly unnecessary.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 14:17, July 10, 2011 (UTC)