Forum:CT:Full implementation of scrollboxes

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Full implementation of scrollboxes


This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was use scroll boxes for long appearance lists rather than separate pages—Green Tentacle (Talk) 13:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Now that we've implemented scrollboxes, I would think that we'd want to use them to eliminate one of the most annoying features of appearances -- the separate pages of appearances used for main characters. It's simply silly to split that information off into a separate article. Even worse, some of those lists are split up by media type, rendering them non-chronological, as they should be. There are only ten articles using them, and it's really annoying to have that information removed from the article when there's a nice little scrollbox template waiting to let us fit it in neatly. Why not integrate and use the scrollboxes for what they were designed to do?

Support

  1. Havac 20:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support, but only if you link me to these 10 articles Jorrel Wiki-shrinkable Fraajic 20:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Category:Appearances lists. Of the thirteen in there, 3 aren't real appearance lists of this sort. Havac 20:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. Adamwankenobi 20:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  4. This user supports this proposal. If asked why, he will refer you to Havac and JorrelFraajic. Seriously, though: I vote yes. Karohalva 20:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  5. Does seem redundant to have both. -- SFH 21:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  6. Lord Hydronium 22:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  7. Absolutely. - JMAS 22:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  8. Thefourdotelipsis 23:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  9. Hey what happened to the four dots? --Azizlight 00:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  10. Imperialles 00:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  11. Green Tentacle (Talk) 23:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  12. Chack Jadson 02:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  13. Even though I have mixed feelings on scrollboxes, I hate the way those appearances pages are organized. -- Ozzel 18:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  14. I like the list pages, but it'll be simplier to just use scoll boxes. -Fnlayson 02:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
  15. Jedimca0 (Do or Do Not, There is No Try) 08:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
  16. I hate separate articles for appearances lists, so I'm in. DarthMRN 13:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

  • Uh.. what?—Unsigned comment by Karohalva (talk • contribs)
  • Keep in mind this has already been decided, so I guess we'll need some kind of supermajority to override the old consensus. My question from the previous thread remains. —Xwing328(Talk) 01:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I don't know about "decided". We've already had as many votes in one day as that thread got in two months. It was brought up, largely ignored, and closed after almost seven weeks of neglect. And as for length, these articles are long enough anyway that anyone on dialup is screwed. The lists aren't saving them that much. I'm also wary of pandering to the lowest possible technological denominator. We should certainly strive to accommodate users who aren't on the cutting edge, but there comes a point where we're sabotaging our effectiveness as an encyclopedia with the 90% of people who don't have dialup. Frankly, if you've got dialup, you've got to accept that things are going to go slow. Havac 02:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

See also

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.