Forum:Nobility template on every world page
Revision as of 23:00, 22 May 2017 by Maksim-Smelchak (talk | contribs)
Forums: Index > Watercooler > Nobility template on every world page
This was copied from Talk:Akigir (world) to ensure a wider public discussion.
- Thomas, the nobility box is duplicated by what you do (Advanced URL & data data statistics for T5SS), but it is important for Wayne and others so they can enter in extra nobility data.
- Is it possible for you to not delete this information or for all of us, as in the wiki team, to discuss it?
- Seriously, not my pet peeve, designed and implemented for others... including by Marc's request as part of future nobility plans.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2017 (EDT)
- The respect for the content and layout of articles goes both ways. I assert that if Wayne or any of the other wiki editors wanted to add content to an article, they are fully capable of adding the correct headers at this same time. And that the Manual of Style/world exists for this exact reason.
- I am also strongly of the belief that the Template: Imperial Nobility, Template: Starport, Template: World Tech, and Template: WorldGov should not be added to every single world article. I'm even thinking about replacing the Imperial Nobility template in the StellarDataQuery.
- There should instead be longer, more comprehensive, articles on each of the settings for these template values, with links from the world articles. These links should be both from the UWP and StellarDataQuery templates (i.e. in the infobox) and in the main article text; either from the header information or the other article information or both.
- Finally, based upon my review of the changes I made the Akigir article, I would say the removal of the Imperial Nobility template and the header was accidental, not intentional. So thank you for having a discussion about these changes. Let's work some more on what the correct and appropriate layout for these articles should be. Tjoneslo (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2017 (EDT)
- Maybe I am getting ready to show my age here, ages ago the conservation of space was at a premium (data-space in your RAM as well as transfer speed through your MODEM) due to the high cost of those micro-circuits. These days RAM and such are ridiculously inexpensive. The limitations of RAM and transfer speeds appear to have been pushed to the far back burner. But why should we burden those highways and parking lots with all the traffic?
- That being said, I still see no reason to duplicate information on the same page, or copy info from one page to the next without elaboration. Take the entry on the starport, you can get that – as well as comparisons from one to the other – on the starport page; I see no need to copy (ok, “template” it) onto the world page. The same can be said for Template: Imperial Nobility, Template: World Tech, and Template: WorldGov unless there is a level of detail unique to that world to make it different enough to detail.
- At that point, the template in use is really irrelevant, because you no longer have a tech level 9 world, but a tech level 9 (interstellar travel) and tech level 16 genetic engineering entry….. a rather unique entry that precludes the template style.
- - Ssteve (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
- How many of you have memorized the entire sequence? Marc Miller hasn't. Rob Eaglestone hasn't.
- We make it easy for new people to get into the hobby by making it easy for them to understand. It's worth the effort and it costs next to nothing in terms of space. And I am one of the only one that takes the effort to do it so it's nothing to you.
- Plus the new authors use those categories and details to help them develop content. MJD does. So do many others. It's meaningful.
- I am fine if all of you don't want to do it, but my newbies as in 20-year-old players need it. Convention game masters write me all the time to tell me how much it's a great touch.
- Let's not be stuck in the old ways. Put yourself in their shoes. I want a new and growing audience, not just old guys quibbling about silly minor details on an old-fashioned forum that almost no one reads.
- - Maksim-Smelchak (talk) 19:00, 22 May 2017 (EDT)