Template talk:Survivor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] External links
Why is it necessary to link to the CBS pages in this template when those links already exists in each article? Jtrost (T | C | #) 14:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- I have no idea. I like the cleaner look without the external links. -- Gogo Dodo 06:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Old vs New Template
I have noticed some users converting the old template into a new one, and personally i think the old template is easier to read and access and looks much better. I do not wish to start an edit war, so i brought the issue to the talk page. What does everyone else think, new or old template? Survivorfan101 (talk) 03:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I have no strong opinion one way or another. On one hand, the old table was easier to read because the font was bigger. On the other hand, I do like the idea of standardization with {{Navbox}}. I know, not exactly a helpful opinion, but I didn't want you to think you weren't noticed. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Since it got changed and reverted back again and here hasn't been any discussion about it, I thought I would start one by proposing a change to Navbox. See User:Gogo Dodo/Survivor Template Test. I still like the standardization with {{Navbox}}. Outright conversion to Navbox doesn't look right, so how about a fixed version? Remove the line breaks and ditch the italics? While removing the italics makes it easier to read, it does go again WP:MOS-T. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Wow, discussion! OK, Gogo Dodo, I do like your lack of italics. I thought them really unneccessary, but neglected to revert them as they seemed to have been there for a while when I noticed them. I am aware that it goes against the MOS... but it is a heck of a lot easier to read. The view/discussion/edit links also make it more functional for easy access to these pages. I like that too. Now, Survivorfan, when you say a new template, do you mean this one we have now with the italics and five seasons across? Or should I go and check the history? I may do that anyway. Anyway, I support Gogo Dodo's Navbox template. It is practical and aesthetically pleasing, and I see no disadvantages. Well, excpept for those old faces around the Survivor pages that don't like change =) -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 09:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- To clarify, the old version is the non-Navbox version per this revision. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- I have actually changed my mind and like both versions now. Sorry trombonator, the "old one" i was referring to back then was the one Gogo has linked to. I do think that the non-Navbox one will continue to get cluttered as more seasons are released so it may be worth changing to the Navbox version, but i'm still torn on which one i think looks better Survivorfan101 (talk) 02:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Winners
*is extremely new to Wikipedia but will try his best to not screw everything up* Um, yeah. I was wondering if it would be a good idea to merge the Winners template with this one - I can do it if you want, I'm not completely Wiki challenged, just Wikipedia... Anyways. Veego laberge (talk) 19:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well it's certainly viable with the longer template now... then there's always the option to put every contestant on it as well... it could get really huge really fast. And it's kind of like the "Seasons" template, not a contestant template. I'll leave it open for someone else to think about. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 10:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
