" 

 == Navbox heading == 

 F.Y.I., wp:APPENDIX does not prohibit navbox headings. For more on this topic, see Wikipedia:Related_information/answers#Generic_objections_and_responses.    

 :Let's discuss this here.    

 ::Is our conversation over? 

 :::Well, I thought it was. Section title removed, done for my part.    

 :::: Well, R is only the second step in BRD. So I was hoping that you would answer the question I posted. (""Which brings us to the other primary benefit of a navbox heading: Letting readers know in the table of contents that an article contains navbox information and making it easy for them to click to jump to that information. Again, not necessary, but helpful. Why not provide that help for our readers?"")    

 :::::I already replied at the Luck talk page that I do not consider section titles for navboxes ""helpful for our readers"", whatsoever.    
 :::::: It was not clear from your posting there: Do you reject the general proposition that headings provide an overview in the table of contents and allow readers to navigate through the text more easily? Or is there something about navboxes that make a heading unhelpful for them only?    
 === Separate navbox info from external links === 

 The point is: section titles seperate sections of texts, because otherwise people would hardly know when one section of text ends and the next one starts. However, everyone can tell where the navboxes are, because they are navboxes.    

 : In my last posting on the Luck page I said ""I certainly agree that a heading is not necessary to assist most readers to visually separate navboxes from external links."" So I think you and I are in agreement with regard to that. Which still leaves unresolved the potential benefit of using headings to provide information in tables of contents.    

 :: As an aside, I note that I also on the Luck pag that ""the lack of a heading still leaves the conceptual problem of internal links in the external links section.""    

 === Jump to navboxes === 

 Do you reject the general proposition that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style&oldid;=347774812#Section_headings headings provide an overview in the table of contents and allow readers to navigate through the text more easily]? Or is there something about navboxes that makes linking to them in a table of contents unhelpful?     

 :I think the number of people who want to jump from the WP:LEAD directly to the navboxes via ToC is pretty small. I willing to take the risk that among these people there are some who don't know the general direction of where to find navboxes if quickly needed.    

 === Give notice of navboxes === 

 Let us further agree that only small percentage of folks actually want to jump to the navbox ""section"" from the ToC. What is your opinion of the ""overview"" benefit (since some articles have navboxes and others don't, having a navbox listing in the ToC lets readers know up front that an article has navigation aids)?    

 : Dude, I simply do not consider it useful. Nor do it like it aesthetically. I just don't like it.    

 :: I respectfully request that you provide a response that speaks to the issue of having a navbox listing in the table of contents. See WP:I just don't like it. If you honor this request then I authorize