Forum:CT Archive/Appearances lists

After seeing a Senate Hall discussion regarding lists of appearances, I decided to create this CT. Basically, the discussion revolved around what should be done with appearances section on OOU articles. Initially, the options discussed were simply keep or kill, but then proposed keeping but hiding such lists, which is what I am now turning into a formal proposal via the CT.

If approved, the MOS for OOU articles would be adjusted to specify that the Appearances section should be placed inside App. The correct format would be:

Appearances
{{App|

Characters
insert list here

Creatures
insert list here

etc. }}

Here's an example of what this would look like. IU articles would not be affected in any way by this proposal; Scroll box would continue to be used on those lists when they get long. Have a nice day! &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 22:44, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Adopt proposal

 * 1) No need to take up 75-90% of each OOU article with a huge list that the casual reader could probably care less about, yet the lists are still useful to some editors. Therefore, it makes sense to me to hide them. &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 22:44, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Definitely. --Imperialles 22:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) This is certainly the best solution, though I don't think it would be as much of a problem if our OOU work articles had more proper content. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 4)  IFYLOFD  ( You will pay the price for your lack of vision! ) 00:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 5)  Chack Jadson  (Talk)  06:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 6)  Grunny  ( Talk ) 09:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) I guess. SoresuMakashi ( Everything I tell you is a lie  the truth  ) 09:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) I agree with Mauser below that I'm not sure the appearance lists are useless to most readers, but making them smaller could be helpful. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 11:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) I like this idea. Atarumaster88  Jedi_Order.svg ( Talk page ) 15:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) As long as they're not removed altogether, I suppose.  CC7567  (talk) 16:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 11) Per Imperialles's comments below. jSarek 00:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 12) Reading the Senate Hall, I was skeptical, but your example won me over.  DarthDragon164 Black dragon.JPGn's Lair 17:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 13) I vote for Cylka's proposal/method first, the hide option second.--ToRsO bOy 17:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 14) * Per Xwing and CC below. Darth Trayus  Sith_Emblem.svg ( Trayus Academy ) 07:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 15) For this discussion, I consider myself more of a "reader" than an "editor" (I get out way more than I put in) and I hate scrolling through pages with long lists like that. I'd much rather have the list initially hidden but accessible if desired. -  Esjs (Talk) 21:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Reject proposal

 * 1) I wonder who decided that appearances lists aren't needed for the majority of readers. I started browsing them long before I started editing the Wookieepedia.  Mauser  Comlink 03:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm a fan of the Appearances lists being just the way they are. Makes my reference work go a lot more smoothly. Taral, Dark Lord of the Sith 15:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) I think you should look at the value to the reader and not just to the editor. The appearance list is the entire reason I use articles.  While I'm reading something, I click on the appearances when they show up in the book so I don't have to type each one in individually.  It saves a lot of time and it is 99% of the reason I use out-of-universe articles.  Hiding this would be hiding the important stuff, and having basically a commercial for the book take priority, one that doesn't help me. -- Xell Khaar 23:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Wait a little bit

 * 1) I highly suggest that we hold off on this for a little bit. I've cleaned up Cylka's version so it is extremely easy to implement compared to the original version. It easily expands and contracts, so each section can have it's own number of columns. Take a look to see how it's done and view it in action here. (You may have to refresh your browser cache to see styling, as I edited the site's CSS.) Also, I will try to implement a template method of this to promote consistency site-wide. —Xwing328 (Talk) 06:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) While I do see the merit behind the idea of "hiding" the appearances, this is a major change that will effect many articles. We seem to be moving very quickly towards an incomplete resolution that isn't going to be as fulfilling as it would be if we were to wait and reexamine both the issue and the results. Perhaps, as Cylka and Xwing have said, there are other options. Darth Trayus  Sith_Emblem.svg ( Trayus Academy ) 07:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Quick question: is this suggesting a simple show/hide which the viewer can change as they please, or a logged in versus logged out, whereby the user doesn't have a choice? -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 22:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Simple show/hide. This has nothing to do with logging in. See the example linked above to see it in action. &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 22:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Just curious, for those who would want the list displayed as the default setting, or those who want it hidden as their default setting, would it be possible to make something they can check/uncheck in their personal preferences as a "default setting"? -  JMAS  Hey, it's me! 23:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, no, although it's only one quick click to show it, so I wouldn't anticipate that being a problem. It's hidden by default. &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 23:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Because the way things are currently is to show the list, then I think displaying the list should be default, with hiding it as the option by clicking the link. I'd support that. -  JMAS  Hey, it's me! 23:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I think a whole new template would have to be made for that. However, I wouldn't support such an idea for the simple fact that the majority of readers aren't going to need or want to read the list. The only people who are going to want the list are a small minority of editors, and even they aren't going to want to see it every time they load an OOU article, so it makes more sense to me to hide it by default. &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 23:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Per Jonathan. We should cater to our readers, not our hardcore list-loving editors. --Imperialles 23:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I see your point. I'll have to give it some more consideration. -  JMAS  Hey, it's me! 23:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * While I'm still weighing the options, I'd like to point out that we won't know for sure who actually uses the Appearances list unless we take a poll of every single person that visits Wookieepedia. There isn't anything that can support that claim. Also, we shouldn't be "catering" to anyone here specifically; the wiki is for more knowledge about Star Wars, and that's both for spreading the knowledge (readers) and gaining more (editors). I fail to see how holding one over the other in importance will improve the wiki.  CC7567  (talk) 06:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to watch this for a little before I lean one way or the other, but the idea is more promising than complete deletion at least. Redlinks are power to the wiki! --  Riffsyphon  1024 06:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * While I'm all for hiding these lists, I think that the actual show/hide-button doesn't look really good. Are there any plans/ideas to make it look better? Otherwise I'd have an idea how this could possibly be resolved.  Pranay Sobusk  ~  Talk  11:47, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with JMAS: surely we can set the button at show position by default, like on infoboxes.  Mauser  Comlink 12:18, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Why on Earth would we default it to show? The goal here is to reduce article length for the average reader, not save a minority of editors the single calorie required to press "show". Consider that a vast, vast majority of the visitors on this site are non-contributing readers. The very idea behind Wookieepedia is to create a Star Wars information repository that everyone can enjoy. If we start catering to editors, we remove ourselves from that goal. --Imperialles 22:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Whatever gives you the idea that the "vast, vast majority of the visitors" don't want to see this information? Nobody has ever taken a site-wide poll. I'll support this proposal to wrap appearances in a template, if only to stop people trying to delete all of that information. But before I do, I think the template needs some work - something specifically designed for this and a bit more aesthetically pleasing. —Xwing328 (Talk) 06:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Xwing in that I will support this measure, but before I vote, I would like to see a more pleasing template. I have been periodically working on the KotOR II video game article and I have spent a lot of time trying to organize it in such a way as to have a pleasant layout. My solution to the overwhelming number of appearances has been to create four columns in order to reduce the space taken up by those sections. Cylka  -talk- 08:55, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think Cylka's design here is a great solution. The thing that always annoyed me was that they're so long, but using this method makes them very short. Though I'm not opposed to a show/hide button, I'd support this solution.  Pranay Sobusk  ~  Talk  13:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Quick questions: Will this apply only to out-of-universe articles (e.g. books, comics, movies, etc.)? Or will it also apply to in-universe articles (e.g. the Appearances section for Luke Skywalker)?  I think that makes a difference, because having all a character's appearances handy is important, but the list of all characters/creatures/places/ships/technology/droids/etc. in a given book might be tedious enough to get condensed (I still voted to leave as-is, but I understand the logic).  Thank you. Taral, Dark Lord of the Sith 11:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OOU only.  Chack Jadson  (Talk) 11:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't intend to sound accusatory, but specifically what is the purpose of the "Wait a little bit" option? What exactly do we wait for: to review the new modification and then vote, or simply hold off voting altogether?  CC7567  (talk) 07:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)