Template talk:NavFlex

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

[edit] Needed?

Is this crap really necessary? Weren't all of our navigational templates okay without this NavFlex stuff? It's done more harm than good. On certain templates like {{prevnextnav}}, it added an extra box to the left side of it. What does this actually do? MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 18:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

This makes one template for all of the navigation templates, rather than re-implimenting the code separately for each one. It's not breaking anything, and It's dot com said that he had been thinking of doing something like this for some time now, and the only thing he doesn't like is the name. There's no reason not to keep it. — Defender1031*Talk 18:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I wrote this less than 24 hours ago, so please have some degree of patience for a few (very minor) aesthetics issues. Feel free to revert templates that have been aesthetically affected, and once I have a chance to fix the code on the main template, we can re-implement them this way, again.
It doesn't really make sense to throw it all away and delete it, though, as this can be fixed, and will make the wiki easier to maintain. This allows for wiki-consistency, as DeFender1031 said, by allowing style changes to be made in ONE place rather than 15 separate splintered templates. This is the way that most wiki projects operate, by using standard classes of templates. As an example, if you wanted to change all of the nav templates across the wiki to be Blue instead of Grey, you could make the change on this template, and it would affect all of them in the same way. Also, if you don't understand it ("What does this actually do?") perhaps you should discuss it prior to proposing deletion :-) LobStoR 19:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, MichaelXXs, don't just put a {{tbd}} on something because you don't understand it. And Deffy, it's really not good form to delete a {{tbd}} tag without discussion. Loafing 19:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I updated the template to fix this aesthetics issue. It took me all of 5 minutes to solve, so thanks for pointing out the glitch :). Let me know here on the talk page if you identify any other problems, so that we can try to fix them. Cheers! LobStoR 19:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Do we need an Uncategorized Template for Non-Toons?

I ask this because an anon is shoe-horning everything not categorized into "Uncategorized Toons" when they are not toons. — Ngamer01 19:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

The category might be better suited as "uncategorized content" but it's not really a big deal... we tend to use the term "toon" loosely. The template there is fine. The view link is necessary, and it's better there than not. Further, there seems to be a fine line between toon and not. What makes Legal not a toon? Homestar pops up and says stuff... and Happy T is certainly a toon, even if there is not animation and they just say things, just like Limozeen vs. Sloshy and Hooked on Decemberween are toons. — Defender1031*Talk 21:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
The command "watch" just doesn't sound right with a page like Legal. If we used the same command that's used in the link at the bottom (we'd have to add a parameter to {{uncattoonnav}}?), then I'd be fine with this. Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 22:23, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools