Talk:Speed clear

Split proposal
Each of the four major speed clears is associated with a specific team build. IMO each of these builds is popular enough to warrant its' own build article. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 04:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree.71.218.95.185 23:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * /agree -- Halogod35  [[Image:User Halogod35 Sig.jpg|15px]] 15:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, i suggested a merge with speed clear on Underworld Speed Clear and nobody opposed it, so this is why its like this -- as it is now with only 1 line of text for 1 of the 4 speed clears i oppose the split, untill somebody gets more info on all of them C4K3 [[Image:User_C4K3_Signature.jpg]] Talk 16:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that with help, I can design each page for these speed clears, as I do them all the time. I haven't done a MQSC before, but I candefinitely help with the UWSC and some of the FOWSC page. I completely support the split.

--Jrhsk8 04:01, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Since they are no content to split yet, I suggest to complete this article to have some overviews about these speed clears. Leaving the discussion of having fully detailed methods and articles for later. I have no idea if uwsc is or will still be possible or not but it should be kept for historical reason eventually Elephant 14:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with Elephant. Until there is content to be split there is no need to. Skykingcst 07:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the page has not enough content for a split to be necessary. Apposed. Animalbrad 20:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

UWSC
Should be kept or have an article, even if it's nerfed. It played a significant role -- Karasu (talk) 02:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, it's a major historical team build. -- [[Image:User Gordon Ecker sig.png]] Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think we should. I've heard it's still possible, but more difficult... --Juze 08:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yup, definitely still possible for more experienced players; the current record is 25 minutes if I remember correctly (post-sliver-nerf). Power WM [[Image:Elementalist-tango-icon-200.png|19px]] 03:22, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Historical. I lol'd. -- Briar    The Spider  12:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

MTSC?
Shouldn't that be added to this list? Waar Kijk Je Naar 10:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * MT? Demonic Fahrir talk 10:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Morostav Trail. Less efficent Kurz farm. Backsword 23:41, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Expansion
I'd like to expand on this article a great deal. Adding things like SC basics, Strategies, and Goals. My only hang-up is that I don't know if I'm going to get brow-beaten for it again. So, Seeing as pretty much any topic I start up is doomed to receive no responses either way, I'll be adding a great deal of information to this page by the end of October. Assuming of course there is no logical dispute as to why I shouldn't (as opposed to simply saying we shouldn't document it because "hurr durr SF is for noobs").-- Briar    The Spider  12:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Article splitting
I don't believe that each speed clear needs its own article; they're highly vulnerable to skill updates (even if we haven't had a big update for a while) and can change or even cease to be possible at any time. The article in its current format is sufficient and can quickly have certain speed clears added or deleted as necessary. At the very most, links to the relevant builds and/or pages on gwpvx.com should suffice. -- ★ KOKUOU ★ 23:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Those are good points, and we're not here to document currently popular builds. But there may be other, more permanent parts, like the general concept of each sc. Might not be enough for an article to be helpful, but it is stuff we should documents. And redirects wouldn't hurt. Backsword 23:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

= Because = The pvx has moved to curse, would it not better to put this [] in, instead?