Forum:TH and SoF navboxes clean up
I just cleaned up the SoF and TH navboxes. Which means that I removed stuff that already has their own navbox and I also made a few new navboxes (Template:Warband armour, Template:Skirmisher armour, Template:Ramokee outfit).
- My question is now, do we really need to add the SoF and/or TH navboxes to the articles that are not on those navboxes? I'd like to remove those navboxes from those specific articles, and then possibly add the specific category to the promotion-specific navbox. E.g. remove the TH navbox from [[Fire poi (Treasure Hunter)]] and add the TH category to Category:Celebration of Fire which is added by Template:Celebration of Fire to the fire poi. We should also create new navboxes for those promotions that do not have one yet.
- Maybe we can mention it in the navbox that it is a TH and/or SoF promotion like I did earlier with quest navboxes being in certain questseries, e.g. Template:Within the Light.
- Like the quest navboxes have Category:Quest templates, I'd like to add the template-only categories of Category:Treasure Hunter templates and Category:Squeal of Fortune templates to templates that belong in there. E.g. Template:Ramokee outfit.
14:31, December 3, 2015 (UTC)
I guess - It's fine to leave the big th template on all the pages even if they're not on it. It provides navigation to other th items. They just can't be on the th template itself because we've hit template limits in the past. MolMan 14:45, December 3, 2015 (UTC)
- That's the point, I don't want to leave a navbox on an article that is not included on that navbox. And I agree, the TH template itself should only contain the basic items like it does now. 14:55, December 3, 2015 (UTC)
Support - It's nice to not have such packed templates. It astounded me when people would remove a navigation box to hide it in another one making it harder to decipher the information easier. I sincerely doubt many people genuinely go through the navigation boxes when they have subsection after subsection. Ryan PM 06:28, December 4, 2015 (UTC)
- Point 2 would be overkill indeed. 01:13, December 8, 2015 (UTC)
Close plox - Seems like everyone agrees on point 1 and 3. So I'll be implementing that from now on. Unless there are any objections, I'd like to close this thread.01:13, December 8, 2015 (UTC)