User talk:Falconeye/Sandbox/Navbars

Bosses

(discussion start)

Skills

→ moved from User talk:Falconeye#Navbars 2.0

They don't go at the top of pages. --JonTheMon 02:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Was trying to setup an quick/easy "two-click" navigation by following the established examples. --Falconeye 02:33, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Which should be fixed. The established examples are the rest of the wiki, where navigation bars are at the bottom (except for very special cases or articles that aren't standardized to the rest of the wiki). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 06:46, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

So, I should move navbar's to the bottem on pre-existing pages with nabars at the top, or are those the exceptions? --Falconeye 16:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Generally, it's about how in-your-face the navbox is. Some of those lists are ancient and could probably be updated, but the nav box on the right isn't in the way. Also, navboxes at the top of articles is a complete No.--JonTheMon 16:23, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I'll try to do better with the layout... perhaps there is a way to merge & collapse 2-or-3 skill nav's so I'm not forced to stack them whenever they overlap? --Falconeye 16:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

How about considering that Navbars aren't needed for every article? If you find yourself trying to add a second one, consider first if it's even appropriate. It's unlikely that an article needs a second navbar (especially since it's possible to link the existing navbar to an appropriate article, which has the other navigation). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I understand only want 1 nav per page; pages only tagged with navs listed said pages; they be placed bottom. I see navbars as an alternative to quick links/searches/categories/etc, and its annoying moving from one nav-page unto one with no nav's ("dead ends") and navbars changing available links.

Is it possible/acceptible to link navbars/pages directly to each other (if not merge/collapse); so as to allow "2-click" while avoiding multiple navs? The simplest approach is having each skill nav link back to <Supertype:Skill lists> (via the "skill lists"): since that page's nav already links to profession skills pages/profession-specific navs plus common, adding "Other" and "Elite" links would do. An alternative option is footnoting each nav with "See also: All skills, By profession, By campaign, By elite, By other (similar to the "Elite skills list nav" and the "Quest list nav").

--Falconeye 23:01, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) You might want to move your sandbox above to an actual sandbox: (1) it makes it easier to discuss general topics on your talk page; (2) it makes it easier to discuss your ideas for navbars; (3) it makes it easier to separate the "talk" from the "suggestion."

You seem to missing the idea that articles shouldn't link to every possibly-, conceivably-, or potentially-related article. Sweet Tooth is a title and the navbar should be specific to the title itself. Sweets are the type of items required to max the title and it makes sense if it links to the specific items, too. (Either as a list or a navbar.)

The more stuff that we add to an article, the more confusing we make things. A paper-based encyclopedia doesn't have the luxury to separate concepts, so it had to add redundant references throughout the text and at the end of articles, but a dynamic hyperlinked wiki can keep things simple for the reader.

Finally, you are trying to solve problems by kludging a solution which creates new ones: "dead ends" can be addressed by adding appropriate links (in some cases — but not all — a navbar); they don't require double navbars. Difficulty in navigation should be resolved by simplifying then navigation, not by doubling up on links — we recently went through this discussion about doubling up on navbars (e.g. here): {{Nightfall missions}} is sufficient, we don't also need {{Missions in Istan}} – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)