Template talk:Suikoden series

Stupid edit war

Sigh. I actually prefer the old navbox entirely, but whatever. I prefer some form of headers - left aligned ones would be best, though seemingly tricky with the new navbox - though that is not a huge issue. The issue is the removal of redlinks. I understand that lesser games might need to be left off when space is at a premium - but it's not, in this navbox. We can fit a comprehensive list easily onto one line even for people with crappy resolutions to their monitors. So, uh, why not? This isn't something like "Random handheld Mario game #12." (No, don't tell me to write the articles on the redlinked games, I don't know anything about them.) SnowFire 02:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because redlinks don't aid in navigation, and this is a navigation tool, not an exhaustive list. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it can be both at no cost. Let's back up a step: Why are lesser games that are redlinks frowned upon in templates? You say "it doesn't aid navigation," which is part of it. The larger reason in my mind is clutter - too many links are distracting and take away value from the other links. I don't believe that clutter is an issue on this template, and it's likely that these games will some day have articles (perhaps because the redlink on the template inspires someone to write the article?).
Anyway... whatever. I'll write stubs on these some time and then put them back. SnowFire 02:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be fine. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Additions

Due to the recent creation of really excellent, cohesive character pages for Suikoden and Suikoden II, I am proposing this as a new template. I'm terrible with tables but I thought this would at least be a start. Thanks! bwowen talk.contribs 00:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't say I agree. There was a trend at CVG awhile back to reduce the size of these standard templates- something which certain editors took a little too far (cough, cough, see above), but still had basic merit. The 108 Stars article and the Notable Suiko characters article are fine as far as links to the character articles. SnowFire 03:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Considering you have more experience with the project, I'll defer to you on this one. Thanks for the input. bwowen talk.contribs 03:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is the addition of recurring characters okay? bwowen talk.contribs 03:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I think the old form of the article was too minor to be mentioned, but it's a good inclusion now. SnowFire 03:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]