Template talk:Ancient Rome military sidebar

message: Since this template is now used across more than a dozen articles, please prporse suggestions for improvements to this template on this talk page before making any changes. Cheers - PocklingtonDan 21:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Before making any changes - read this

message: Hi. I am going to revert the edit of this template to remove the link to the Classis Britannica - it is too insignificant a topic to be linked to at this level. The aim of the template is to provide links only to very common or broad articles, which then contain links in term to more specific articles. It is not practical to list every fleet and every legion individually, but note that for legions there is a "list of legions" page. For the classes, there is "Roman Navy" linked to from the template and we could add a link to a "list of fleets" page or similar from the template if you wished, and if you thought it deserved a separate page from Roman Navy. The template is now used on quite a few Roman military pages and I want to stop it growing out of control with hundreds of unmanageable links. Hope this revert is OK! Please respond on my talk page or the template talk page with any further comments of questions. Cheers - PocklingtonDan 16:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, that's fair.  Thought I could put a link to it since there is only one separate Classis page so far, but your point is more valid, and the 'list of fleets page' would, at the moment, be just a precis of Roman Navy. User|Neddyseagoon 19:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I appreciate there is only one classis page so far, but i think it only serves to artificially inflate the perception of the importance of the CB to link to it at this level, users might not realise there are simply no articles existing for the other classes. Thanks for the understanding :-) - PocklingtonDan 19:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: What happened to the template?! It used to be a fairly good mechanism for tying the related articles about the Roman Military together. Now, I can't even reach some of them following the chain of articles! Cleanliness might me next to godliness, but functionality rates higher. - Vedexent (talk) - 14:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, one has to notice that the titles are links. May I point out that black-on-purple and navy-on-purple are not overly visually distinct? That the headers are also links might be missed - at least I missed it :) - Vedexent (talk) - 14:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No problem, I'll make it visually clearer that the headers are links. Cheers - PocklingtonDan 16:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it any clearer now? I restructured it initially so that it linked to a greater range of articles (albeit some of these had to be access through "list of" articles). I think the style attributes make it clearer now that the headers are links too but if not let me know. Cheers - PocklingtonDan 16:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I think it is clearer now that the titles are links. - Vedexent (talk) - 16:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, great  PocklingtonDan 16:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RomanMilitary template and [[Classis Britannica]]