Talk:Mumu-Obscura

Regarding the beginning-of-article formatting... I intentionally mentioned the IDW continuity specifically because I felt like it would be an implied overstatement to claim that the planet exists in the G1 continuity family, when it probably exists only in this one continuity.

But it DOES exist in the G1 continuity family. I guess "x in the x continuity family" means something different to you than it does to me. It's never implied to me that x exists across the entire continuity family, just that it exists within this one continuity family and not the others. --ItsWalky 16:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Further, even if it does exist in other continuities, I doubt the opening paragraph's statement about the Reapers would apply to them. I've kind of started to feel that short, simple articles don't need to have a "fiction" section, but can simply be written out with the usual statement restricting the article's applicability and no sections. The orbital jump article I wrote a while back, for instance. I don't think the clarity of an article like that is served by forcing a "fiction" header into the middle of it. --Steve-o 16:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Technically, I would rewrite this article to better accomodate the formatting anyway, and not leave it as it is. (I would have yesterday, but I don't have the issue.) I think the format of all non-real-life articles should state the faction/animal/vegetable/mineral and continuity family, have an opening paragraph to describe them, and then talk about what stories they're in. If they're only ever mentioned in one storyline, that would be made apparent by what's listed under the fiction section. --ItsWalky 16:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)