Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Skill"

From GodWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Awesome work!: new section)
 
(Awesome work!: Make way for Hypocrisy Man! \o/ (That's me.))
Line 6: Line 6:
 
# Since every Skill box will always have a <strike>Category</strike>Type, but they ''won't'' all necessarily have a Description, personally I'd place Type before Description in the row order. It's a bit disconcerting, I've found, if rows seem to shift around from article to article. It tends to be less jarring if all the required ones are at the top, and they always stay in the same order. ...Another option would be to make Description a required field, and display ''Unknown'' if it's left blank. Then there's no reason to change the order. Up to you!
 
# Since every Skill box will always have a <strike>Category</strike>Type, but they ''won't'' all necessarily have a Description, personally I'd place Type before Description in the row order. It's a bit disconcerting, I've found, if rows seem to shift around from article to article. It tends to be less jarring if all the required ones are at the top, and they always stay in the same order. ...Another option would be to make Description a required field, and display ''Unknown'' if it's left blank. Then there's no reason to change the order. Up to you!
 
It really does look great, though. Thanks! -- [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 05:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 
It really does look great, though. Thanks! -- [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 05:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 +
: {{tqb|Since every Skill box will always have a <strike>Category</strike>Type, but they ''won't'' all necessarily have a Description, personally I'd place Type before Description in the row order.}}
 +
: Not that you could tell from {{tlx|Equipment}}, where I now see that I failed to follow my own rule. So, maybe ignore that one. (I think what happened there is, Description ''used'' to be required, but we decided to make it optional... and I either didn't think to change the ordering, or decided to still keep it at the top. For ''reasons'', possibly!) -- [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 07:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:13, 8 April 2019

Awesome work!

This looks wonderful! I'll kick the tires a little over at Special:ExpandTemplates (which I'd meant to mention as another invaluable testing tool), but on first glance it seems great to me. I have two — OK, three — minor suggestions:

  1. Accepting |category= for the skill type might be a bit confusing, since "category" has a specific meaning on the GodWiki. (IOW, if a user sees a |category= parameter, will they think they're supposed to fill in a wiki category name like "Category:Transportation skills"?) Might be better to avoid overloading that specific word.
  2. Because of the previous, and regardless whether you keep |category= or not, I would definitely use "Type" as the display label for the row. Or something else, like... well, any word other than "Category", really.
  3. Since every Skill box will always have a CategoryType, but they won't all necessarily have a Description, personally I'd place Type before Description in the row order. It's a bit disconcerting, I've found, if rows seem to shift around from article to article. It tends to be less jarring if all the required ones are at the top, and they always stay in the same order. ...Another option would be to make Description a required field, and display Unknown if it's left blank. Then there's no reason to change the order. Up to you!

It really does look great, though. Thanks! -- FeRDNYC (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Since every Skill box will always have a CategoryType, but they won't all necessarily have a Description, personally I'd place Type before Description in the row order.

Not that you could tell from {{Equipment}}, where I now see that I failed to follow my own rule. So, maybe ignore that one. (I think what happened there is, Description used to be required, but we decided to make it optional... and I either didn't think to change the ordering, or decided to still keep it at the top. For reasons, possibly!) -- FeRDNYC (talk) 07:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)