User talk:Jean inkura

Combat Anomaly footer

Hey, Jean! Template:CMBSite has existed since long before I became Wiki Manager (or even joined EVE University!). I'm not super fond of it, and I'd like to eventually phase it out because it's massive and unwieldy, but that fact that it's an all-in-one template that is fairly easy to follow means that until I come up with a better alternative, I can't easily get rid of it. I'd like to avoid making it any bigger, so I'm going to say no specifically to making {{Combat Anomalies}} a permanent component of {{CMBSite}} itself, but you are more than welcome to include it in your articles separately.

As far as usage, it appears that you can control the collapsed and visible sections using a faction name as the template's argument, so you wouldn't necessarily be using {{Combat Anomalies|Blood}} in all cases, though you've likely figured that out. I do like {{Combat Anomalies}} as a template very much, so it will definitely be sticking around, and it may even get some additional attention in the future, depending on whether certain plans come to fruition. Thank you again for all your hard work! - Djavin novienta (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2017 (CDT)

Thanks for the quick answer. I guess I was under the impression that the CMBSite template was created to streamline the display and format of the anomaly pages for consistency and uniformity, which it does well. I'm not sure why you would want to phase it out. While I get that it is massive, it certainly isn't hard to use, quite the opposite in fact. Calling the {{Combat Anomalies}} template within the {{CMBSite}} template would be default (no user added argument), saving the time consuming manual editing to add it to every single page. Although an optional "faction" argument would be nice, allowing to show by default, within the table, all other anomalies available for that particular page's featured Faction. Isn't this the perfect example of a template's purpose? --Jean inkura (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2017 (CDT)

{{Combat Anomalies|{{{Faction|}}} }}

You make a good point. Consider me swayed on this topic - you are welcome to add {{Combat Anomalies}} to {{CMBSite}}.

On a related note, however, one of my other wiki team members (rather serendipitously) just reopened a discussion about {{CMBSite}} that began when it was created more than a year ago. Given that he was around at its inception, he's in a position to provide some valuable insight, and there is an entire thread detailing the template's creation that I didn't even know existed until now. I've added you the Wiki OOC usergroup on the forum, which will allow you to access [url=https://forum.eveuniversity.org/viewtopic.php?p=867129#p867129]that discussion thread[/url], as well as the Wiki Staff forum. I think it's important that you be able to participate in that discussion, since you are one of the people making use of the template in question. Please let me know if you have any difficulty accessing that part of the forum. I and the rest of the team look forward to hearing your thoughts! - Djavin novienta (talk) 13:05, 10 June 2017 (CDT)

Thanks for adding me to the forum group, although I don't seem to be able to post a reply. I find it interesting that some see "clutter" when looking at the template's arguments when in fact it provides an easy way to enter missing information. I could have easily removed any argument that wasn't used, but left them instead on purpose so that someone running the sites (I'm in Angel space) could fairly easily fill in the blanks. I see clutter when I look at the old version of the Blood Forsaken Rally Point or the Guristas Haven pages, although the later could easily happen within the CMBSite template... I appreciate you including me in the "debate" of the merits of a given template or format but personally I prefer spending my time actually editing as I don't know much about the intricacies of running a wiki and the demand on resources caused by large parsing templates.

PS. It dawns on me that the CMBSite template is also used for Combat Signature Sites so it would need another argument such as SiteType:

{{#ifeq: {{{SiteType}}} | Anomaly | {{Combat Anomalies|{{{Faction|}}} }} |}}

I don't know if there is a similar Combat Signature template, but if there was, it could also be called when appropriate using something like

{{#if: {{{SiteType}}} | {{Combat {{{SiteType}}}|{{{Faction|}}} }} |}}

- Sincerely, --Jean inkura (talk) 18:05, 10 June 2017 (CDT)