Board Thread:Officer's Pub (Staff Only, idiots)/@comment-26074921-20130617192823

I would like to propose a different way to handle battles that have been previously written but afterwards deemed unfair.

The current system for battles that are deemed unfair is simple yes, but I feel it's not the ebst way to represent the wiki.

Currently, (and I believe I missed this whole discussion), the way to distinguish an battle that has been deemed unfair has been to remove it from the battle status and simply change the expert's opinion with a message regarding the now unfair status. However these battles are not seperated out from the other battles nor is there any other indication of such.

What I would suggest is this: Battles that are deemed unfair are moved to the bottom the page with the heading lowered by one (from == to ===) and placed under a heading at the bottom of the page reading "Other Battles" with the current message modified and put under here, then listing the battles. This would also allow the original expert's opinion, if there is one, to stay along with separating out the unfair battles in a much clearer way

So the code would look like this for WARRIOR A who had two battles declared unfair and two not

Battle vs. WARRIOR B
(Text)

Experts opiion
(Text)

Battle vs. WARRIOR C
(Text)

Experts opiion
(Text)

Battle vs. WARRIOR D
(Text)

Experts opiion
(Text)

Battle vs. WARRIOR E
(Text)

Experts opiion
(Text)

I'd also like to suggest doing a second option differing in that the actual battle is not written on the page, but instead a link to the battle and a header provided. However I doubt that this option would be that popular. 