Forum:Template: Mounts

Forums: Village pump → Template: Mounts
(This topic is archived. Please do not edit this page!)

Template:Mounts - has gotten just too big... course it started out too big too... its essentially a category in a box. I dread adding the next 50+ mounts they'll add in the next expansion. This template should be destroyed and if users want a navigational template at the bottom of mount pages that ones could be created for mounts of similar nature, see example:

Opinions? Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 05:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

So you are proposing making a template for each (Type) of mount: Proto-drakes, Bears, Horses, Tigers, Mechstriders, etc ... -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei | ^C | _TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) MorphgnomeMorphdraenei 06:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather a dozen or so templates for each type, then this category in a box roaming any further. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 06:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I think this looks great! I'm wondering, would it still be a good idea to have to have a mounts template as well, but that only listed types of mounts? We'd probably need to add "mount type" pages though to make it happen:

This might be overkill, but again, throwing out some ideas.  Howbizr^(t·c) 11:08 AM, 27 Jul 2009 (EDT)

The links shouldn't all be title case. See Project:NAME#Other_articles. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:42 AM PST 27 Jul 2009

Just axe all mount templates: categories should be sufficient. -- foxlit (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

In response to Foxlit, I know people work hard on categories, but I'm just a visual person. I love these kinds of templates. And with all the achievements associated with mounts, I think having some "mount type" pages might be a good space to discuss the mounts.  Howbizr^(t·c) 11:10 AM, 27 Jul 2009 (EDT)

I Agree -- I am Visual I do not use categories as a general rule, only on occasion -- I think we need mount templates. -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei | ^C | _TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) MorphgnomeMorphdraenei 15:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

So you Visual people prefer text in a box to text on a page. Fascinating. :) -- foxlit (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

No, it's just that categories are too limited. They have sorting issues, they can't have images next to text, they have fixed font sizes, etc. Also a list of categories at the bottom of the page is less helpful for quickly finding relationships between things. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:42 AM PST 27 Jul 2009

Not to mention you can Organize/Group things in a template and can not do that in with a string of categories at the bottom of the page. -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei | ^C | _TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) MorphgnomeMorphdraenei 01:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps this isn't a good example of visual since it's just a fat listing, but it's harder (several clicks, several page loads) to go across sister nodes in the category tree. So does any have a disliking for my idea about mounts? Just to emphasize again if there's people willing to make them, I definitely like the smaller templates as well (such as bear mounts) where needed. Obviously we wouldn't need one for "chicken mounts" or "pheonix mounts."  Howbizr^(t·c) 7:51 AM, 28 Jul 2009 (EDT)

If you mean using your template (or one similar to it) as the new main template for mounts and then using Coobra's as the sub-templae(Child template) on the individual mount pages, then yeah I can agree go for that. Like this on each of the Bear mounts pages:

Horses on the each horse mount page, etc. -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei | ^C | _TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) MorphgnomeMorphdraenei 20:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

General thoughts: if the intention of the mounts template is to help you navigate around all the 100+ mounts, that's really the job of the mounts page. It does sound more sensible to have a template for the different mount types, with navigational templates within that mount type. Basically what Morph suggests. Kirkburn  talk  contr 16:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that's enough consenus to get cracking. Obviously up to you Coobra if you want to take the restriction off the template or not.  Howbizr^(t·c) 5:00 PM, 30 Jul 2009 (EDT)

Protection level lowered. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 03:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

See also the project page.  Howbizr^(t·c) 5:15 PM, 31 Jul 2009 (EDT)

Actually that's a completely different project, nothing to do with the template. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 06:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

If a bunch of new pages are going to be made for this, please follow Project:NAME. Many of the examples above are not following Project:NAME (i.e. Argent Tournament Mounts vs. Argent Tournament mounts). Mounts should not be capitalized unless there is an item name with it capitalized. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:53 PM PST 31 Jul 2009

Thanks for the reminder. It was just a draft.  Howbizr^(t·c) 8:46 PM, 31 Jul 2009 (EDT)

Creation

Went ahead and created the new look, while everything is not complete, wanted to get opinions before everything is converted. Using the bears example again:

Decided to just go with the creature types in the main window and for things that don't apply will have their own section for just the second window:

-- Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 22:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Full speed ahead from me.  Howbizr^(t·c) 7:01 PM, 13 Aug 2009 (EDT)

Looks great, keep it up.  I want to say the new mount <group> pages Wyvern mounts, Gryphon mounts, etc ... look great.  I think the usage of the <gallery></gallery> tags make a more proffesional looking page.  I, also, agree that all of the swift / non swift mounts, of the same type, should be merged.  I forget which pages you put the merge tags on but I agree they should be merged. -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei | ^C | _TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) MorphgnomeMorphdraenei 23:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I want to be able to list all the mounts past and present, but I want a way to show you can no longer obtain one through the template... what do you think? a (NLA) meaning no longer available, (NA) not available, or just strike it out? Unless you guys have a better idea for marking as such... Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 01:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with "NA", "N/A", or Strike (however don't use the deprecated <s> tag please, use {{strike}}). I think "NLA" is an unknown acronymn and should be avoided.  Howbizr^(t·c) 9:22 PM, 13 Aug 2009 (EDT)

{{Mounts}} is no more, {{Mountfooter}} has taken over. I went through them a few times to see if I missed any, I did miss a few, but it should be good now. If I did miss more, let me know. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 23:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)