Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Navboxes

message: Constant additions to the proposal category are screwing up the category watchlist Javascript. Discuss it. -Amarkov moo! 05:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please stop edit warring 

message: (Starting note: since the other sections were getting long, I decided to make this new one). Why does it seem to be so bad to section templates off?  I'm not asking for much. An example of a template that need sections: Resident Evil. For Resident Evil: main games, then spinoffs (or other games), and a section for characters and other articles. Calling the template "video games" and jamming the articles all together isn't helping alot. Then a section for films. I've seen versions of a template with these sections: and it looks fine (but has been reverted due to "standard appearance"). Comments? Thoughts? RobJ1981 06:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you seen how the template was split into multiple templates? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you in reference to Resident Evil or another game?  I don't think I've seen it for Resident Evil.  Or are you saying sectioning makes it look like multiple templates?  (If that's the case): I still feel strongly a cluttered bulleted list in a template isn't helping to navigate. Even with the words "film" by the Resident Evil movies, it's still a jammed in cluttered mess. RobJ1981 06:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am referring to the Resident Evil template, which was split earlier this evening. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok my bad then. I checked it: I still don't agree with the listings of characters and creatures. They are related (and for the games): but wouldn't it make more sense to just have the complete name of the list article in the template? It's a space issue somewhat, but not a huge extra amount would be used. RobJ1981 06:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Be my guest. I don't know who started everyone doing that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ya that was one of the big resons why i am against this guidline. for example the Half life series nav boxes had all the games important characters and other useful info that made it great. but now its just a clump of games at the bottom of the page that isn't all that useful.Chardrc 12:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections in navboxes

message: This is going on in at least three different places, so let's focus. WT:CVG#Navboxes III: Son of Navboxes seems like as good a place as any (since it's visible and relevant), so let's all go there. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centralized discussion 

message: Carrying over topics from Navboxes III for identification purposes. ♦TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 17:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just put together a list of what was talked about on the other page. I'll change the title of this section. ♦TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 21:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a good start; I'm just not sure where we are on most of it, since I'm not sure if the conversations petered out from a lack of interest, a lack of ideas, or what. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Might have gotten tired of debating/arguing/etc., which is why I think we should take this one step at a time, rather than jumping right to change. ♦TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 23:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Th1rt3en; we should only work on one point at a time. It might take longer, but this is Wikipedia, not a bomb squad, and time is a luxury we have. --Miguel Cervantes 00:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current discussed topics 

message: Based on what has been discussed (unpopularity, no original consensus), I believe the  template should be changed to . Any comments/suggestions/objections? -♦TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 17:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing to suggested policy 

message: Since one of the reasons this policy was made was to prevent navboxes from becoming bloated, I suggest instead of strictly controlling what goes into the navboxes there could be a cleanup template for bloated templates. Something like:
{
This might cut down on edit warring within templates when there is a conflict of interest. (Video game proposal — Generic proposal) ♦TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 03:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a good way to encourage discussion, so it's definitely worth trying out. Before that is needed, however, we may need to address what links are allowable in templates (that's if we keep this guideline). I have to go to work right now, so I'll have to continue this later on. RobWill80 12:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and created  ♦TH1RT3EN talk ♦ contribs 20:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marking bloated templates for cleanup