Template talk:Raid nav
From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
With regards to the gutting[edit]
I understand that for now there is no need to have the nav as I had it due to there only being one raid; but why is it necessary to cut it down to a static version? The idea was to create a template which would be adaptable to all future wings+raids without any extra work. If the formatting was not nice I can try to address that, but I really don't see why there was a need to gut the dynamic version of it. At this point it might as well be Forsaken Thicket Nav and not Raid nav.
Is there a specific reason why this should remain static? If not I feel like reverting to a dynamic nav is the better option. -Darqam (talk) 23:32, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- It links the the same pages that was on the previous version without the excess repetition and unnecessary collapsed section. Copying the version from {{precursor weapons nav}} was not necessary at all and that template was created specifically for that unique subject. {{Forsaken Thicket nav}} was updated to navigate between key pages for the raid wings within that zone. —Mora 23:46, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- It does link to the same page, yes; but the moment a new raid comes out this has to be redisigned. So I don't see why you would remove the attribute of the template to recognize 'where' it is. I do agree that the addition of the Forsaken Thicket nav to the pages you added it to is better; however the way you left the raid nav makes it completely useless and and might as well be hardcoded in Forsaken Thicket page. The point of me having the collapsible section was so that when future raids come out (potentially not in maguuma) there is a sorting measure in place. Granted this is probably not the cleanest way to do it but it is a way. I am all for improving any ideas I have, but removing their entire functionality with no replacement is not OK in my opinion. -Darqam (talk) 00:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- It is the exact... same... thing. There is absolutely no added benefit for this current format and just adds completely unnecessary clutter. Why does this need to be future proofed potentially a year or more in advance and why would it need to stay as this version in that time when (as pointed out) the standard version is the exact... same... thing. Adding a new row for a new raid and wings is not a redesign; it's simply adding to it like what is done with other nav bars. —Mora 00:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- That covers the next 5 raids; how is the excessive dynamic format and collapsible sections required for this template? —Mora 01:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hrm fair enough. In my head I saw things to be better sorted out by region of the world, but in hindsight that might not be ideal. Feel free to clear it back out. -Darqam (talk) 01:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as an "excessive dynamic format", all nav templates should be generated dynamically ideally. We can't do that here because we don't track raids and the wings. This nav is relatively static so it doesn't make a difference if we create it manually or dynamically.--Relyk ~ talk < 01:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- "No such thing as excessive dynamic format", pssh. Convoluted code for the sake of convoluted code frightens away the newbies. They're like bunnies. --Idris (talk) 02:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- ^this. Making it so that anyone can edit it is always a good idea. -Chieftain Alex
11:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- ^this. Making it so that anyone can edit it is always a good idea. -Chieftain Alex
- "No such thing as excessive dynamic format", pssh. Convoluted code for the sake of convoluted code frightens away the newbies. They're like bunnies. --Idris (talk) 02:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- There's no such thing as an "excessive dynamic format", all nav templates should be generated dynamically ideally. We can't do that here because we don't track raids and the wings. This nav is relatively static so it doesn't make a difference if we create it manually or dynamically.--Relyk ~ talk < 01:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
- Hrm fair enough. In my head I saw things to be better sorted out by region of the world, but in hindsight that might not be ideal. Feel free to clear it back out. -Darqam (talk) 01:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
