Thread:TerrariamcSwaggins/@comment-25819541-20150210212129/@comment-24133975-20150210224729

XxLegoTadhgxX wrote: Just about the 7+ links over long time.

For the record, Seven is a pretty loose number we use in marking incomplete pages. If the page is really well done, then it may take more broken links than normal to get it marked. If it's not very well done, it may take less.

XxLegoTadhgxX wrote: Does that include stuff like how Noah keeps acting stupid about having things being unlinked means it isn't incomplete? Blank links should count as much as red links is all

You are correct. Blank links = broken links. Attempts to hide broken links by blanking them will not be tolerated around here. With that in mind, articles with plenty of blank links will still be marked as incomplete. (Missing information and such will also count, but I won't go into detail as it's not really relevant.)

TheFlamingScyther wrote: For an extended period of time. Noah created it relatively early. Maybe some week ago, idk. Also incomplete article is an article with many (7+ approximately) broken, red links or missing sections/stats. I personally don't think there's anything to carry about. Noah is working on it frequently and even today he created some pages, linked it and other stuff.

Scyther is correct. Considering that the article was just recently created (four days) ago, and considering that Noah is actively working on it, there's no need to worry about marking it right now. (I know this isn't the main point of your question, but I might as well address it anyways.)

TheFlamingScyther wrote: Second of all it might be a way of thinking about certain idea. This way the creator can still rethink everything instead of just assuming the page will be named like that, etc.

The creator can still change their mind on what they'd like to name an article, even if the link is already set up. In total, there's not much point in blanking out links.