Template talk:Infobox soap character 2/Archive 2

message: Shall we add more fields here? They have been quite thorough on the Us soap infobox Template:Infobox soap character Gungadin♦ 18:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also what are your thoughts about including more image fields for recasts? They have done this in the Us infobox too, they seem to have 3 options, see here for example Babe Carey.Gungadin♦ 18:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really mind if you add more family and image fields. I also don't really mind if you don't. Might as well do it then... lol — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 19:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, I appreciate your thoroughness, but don't you think "great great grandchildren" and "2nd cousin four" is overkill? I don't even think someone's second cousin four times removed should be mentioned in their infobox at all, that's like listing "guy that lives in the same town."  Just my 2 cents. ;) — TAnthonyTalk 06:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: lol, that's very true. The recent additions of all those fields is just a compromise, so that we can keep the family lists off the bottom of the character pages (they kept being reinstated). I dont mind how thorough people are with it as long as it stops all the reverting and edit-warring :) Gungadin 11:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

text: It gets rid of the family sections people seem to hate, but keeps the information in a hiddne bit of the infobox - the fields are all optional, and have only been added if they are needed for certain characters. (See Nellie Ellis). I don't see what the problem is. It's a compromise, thorough and optional. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 17:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More family fields 

message: There's a stray {{#if: |  on here somewhere, which is showing up on all the infobox 2s. I cant spot it, can u see it? Gungadin 22:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done it but it got rid of "other relatives" cos I copied it form Ibox 3 - but we dont need "other relatives" anyway. The documentation needs sorting out, and I don't understand it... -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 22:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, we've now added all other relatives possible, so it's redundant anyway :) Gungadin 22:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fix needed

message: Shall we add a 3rd image box. They have 3 image fields in the US soap infobox. Will be good for characters like Jnaine and Liam Butcher.Gungadin 16:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Janine's and Peter's look fine at the moment - I think another section will look too big. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 16:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont like the way they look at the moment. I prefer it with just two images.Gungadin 16:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What's wrong with how they look? -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 16:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

text: It looks like a collage, and makes the ibox too big.Gungadin 16:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If we add a third image box maybe we should make the second and third image boxes collapsible like the family box? -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 16:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Or we could try to have it so it goes:
Image
Caption
Image
Caption
to break up the pictures, because at the moment it's:
Image
Image
Caption
Caption -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 17:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I dont think I'd be keen on collapsible, cos I like having the original actors constantly visible.  let's try the "br" thing, that might work. We should probably change the title to "alternative image(s)" tooGungadin 17:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  3rd image and caption