FANDOM


  • I know this has been discussed before but I think it really needs to be addressed and actually enacted since we now have even more characters after Secret War, but Character disambiguation pages are getting too big for all the different versions of major characters such as Spider-Man with what feels like hundreds if not thousands of versions, some of which are just cameos and not all of which are even showing up due to page loading.

    So we need to find and enact a way to fix this, beyond just increasing the number shown on a page. I remember Adour having a good suggestion for this a while back and even had a mock-up display. I just can't find it or remember what it was, but the Moderators and Admins need to come up with a solution and implement it.

    One suggestion I have is find the main ones people view and search for and separate those on the main disambiguation page (Major Universes, Major Films, TV shows and Video Games, maybe alternate versions that stand out). Then have a separate page for the rest, subdivided into different sections, potentially under the headings:

    1. What if, What The and Not Brand Eck versions
    2. Completely different versions (Various Spider-verse spider-men that had minor roles would be an example)
    3. Merge the rest of the Film, TV show and Video Game into one section
    4. I would also suggest the trimming down of the Others section and either the removal or trimming down of the Related sections to remove those barely tangentially related and to only include the important ones. The main ones of which should probably go on the main page (Ben Reilly, Kaine like characters again as an example.

    If anyone has a suggestion at all for a way to change this problem, join the discussion, we just need to make a change.

      Loading editor
    • We had a discussion about the issue a little while ago and only quick solution founded was to split disambiguations in line of your proposal.

        Loading editor
    • Well then I did not know that but I think the issue still needs to be addressed, and to include the moderators in on the discussion as well, more opinions, more ideas etc etc

        Loading editor
    • You're right that it's still unaddressed and therefore bringing it into discussion on open board was right thing to do. It would be good to have a guideline about Disambiguation. I also think that Template:Disambiguation is holding us back and would need improvement. Maybe we shouldn't even use it on all disambiguation pages.

        Loading editor
    • So when shouldn't we use the disambiguation page and in what way would you improve it,

        Loading editor
    • I wouldn't use the template at all because it's so hard to arrange entries alphabetically, it restricts our use of different sections and limits entries unnecessarily. It also don't allow any use of explaining text to link. To sum it up, page template restricts our flexibility to design a page to achieve a look of a gallery page.

        Loading editor
    • Hi, i've been directed by Mrkermit to discuss here. Maybe something like this would do? The gallery tag would make the template very nice and tidy.. This is just an example as the comic version wouldn't be under Television of course in the actual template. Maybe I should create a template on my user page and experiment a bit?

      (Check below)

        Loading editor
    • I like the design, I just would need to see it more populated so yes experiment with it on a user page. Including all those characters who you believe are major versions of iron man and link below. (Also centre the text below the image and maybe see what it looks like with the universe designation as well)

        Loading editor
    • Here's the hub proposal with the mock-up that Copeinator mentioned in the first message of this thread (originally posted in this discussion, which delves into some technicalities):

      User - ADour hub test

      I would also like to mention that I don't think using a gallery would be a good idea. The current display used in disambiguation templates makes every image have the same width (and height, if the image isn't landscape-oriented). And I think that makes it look much more tidy. You just need to compare the galleries from the disambigs of the DC Wiki with those from the Marvel wiki to see where I'm coming from.

      The only advantage I can think of that comes from using regular galleries is that they allow for an easy change in the order of the images, unlike the disambig boxes. If you add a new element in the middle of a box list, you need to edit one by one the number of the other boxes. If there was a way to code the current disambig boxes so they could operate in a similar way to galleries, it'd be perfect.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, that is exactly what I was talking about, that we need that as a template so all major characters (probably those with 30+ alternate versions), with all the the major alternate universes, related on that page. Anyone here capable of making it to get a test page, to see how it actually looks on both computer and mobile?

      Galleries are possible to be made so that all images are the same size and square, we would just have to make sure all disambiguation pages use the same style, so i'm not sure that that would be a major issue

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123 wrote: Galleries are possible to be made so that all images are the same size and square, we would just have to make sure all disambiguation pages use the same style, so i'm not sure that that would be a major issue

      Yup, gallery tag can be customized to force a certain uniformal size. Also, that design mockup is very nice but please, remember the Marvel Database Wikia mobile app is very popular, and design heavy things tend to get broken when displayed on mobile, worth noting that the Marvel app is one of few that actually get continuous and exclusive features such as "Discussions" so making sure it displays properly on mobile is another important thing.

        Loading editor
    • I didn't think that was very design heavy, it looks simplistic enough that it should load on phones, but we couldn't say for sure until a test page is made.

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123 wrote: I didn't think that was very design heavy, it looks simplistic enough that it should load on phones, but we couldn't say for sure until a test page is made.

      The image usage itself will make it appear out of proportions on mobile screens I think, unless that wasn't the way it would work.

      As for the usage of template parameters, such as Television1, Television2, etc... all of those can be cleaned up with AWB once we create a proper solution/template.

        Loading editor
    • If we are planning on simplifying the disambigs to feature only the most important alternates and have a link to a separate page listing all disambigs (which is a proposition I definitely support), we should have some concrete criteria for what consists of a notable/important alternate so that we don't end up with the kind of mess that happens in the Others section of pages like Captain America and Spider-Man. Maybe a minimum number of appearances or a explicit explanation in cases where an important character actually has very few appearances?

        Loading editor
    • I was considering :

      • the most recent TV shows, movies and video games (if a new one comes out the old one is replaced).
      • Characters that have high traffic (I assume we can see the traffic to those pages)
      • Alternate realities that are popular and distinct enough from mainstream (Ultimate, 1602, Old Man Logan, Zombie, Apes etc, etc) and they must have played a significant role in the stories from said reality or have a significant number of appearances.

      On this front what I was also considering is that the main alternate universes page should be editable by everyone. The main hub page should only be by moderators and admins, otherwise we'll get people adding their own favourite spider-man to the hub page.

      Others and related should only be those that are directly related, so war machine and iron man armours are good examples. These should only be limited to 6 at the most and would probably be "side-kicks"/clones/Others's who have used the mantle and equipment/armour/costume if important.

      EDIT: I threw this together in an hour just to see what a simple one would look like based on Adour's design. The characters used were just some the distinct ones i saw going through the long list quickly, none of them are set in stone.

        Loading editor
    • All of those are good ideas. I tried to sort of add my own suggestions with another version of the test page here. There's a bunch of stuff that could be improved upon if this mishmash is turned into a template, like changing the format of the portal boxes so the text of the alternate universe name and number is displayed like in the disambigs (in the mock-up, it can be seen that the text in the "Alternate Reality Versions" gallery links to the page of the character instead of the page of the universe).

        Loading editor
    • I like the way yours has turned out using portal boxes a little more than my own, I just think we should include the name of the character when its not the same so I added Antonio Stark to see what it looked like, and a new box to see what it looked like with a second row. From the previous thread on hubs there seemed to be a unanimous agreement to use it, does that carry over to now?

      Also how do we want to arrange the rest of the alternate universe versions past the hub page, even with the hub page there will still be a load of versions, so do we want to define a couple of different pages for disambiguations, maybe have one for all the various what if, what the? etc etc stories (maybe seperated by cameo/background appearances and actual plot relevent), another for all non comic appearances (Video Game, TV Show, Movie, Web Series) and another for all other universes. Though we may still need another one depending on how this splits everyone up.

        Loading editor
      • Iron Man would be the hub page.
      • Iron Man (disambiguation) just like wikipedia would be the disambiguation page (obviously), maybe with simple links to all alternate versions.

      Ugh the Marvel comics and their alternate realities are really annoying and confusing, but I have to agree with @Copeinator123, just keep the most popular and known ones in the hub pages.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think using the current format is a bad idea. Separating different media and ordering the versions numerically based on the reality number. The creation of a separate hub from a full disambig is already meant to sort the reality versions by relevancy.

      Maybe we can additionally separate the elements of the disambig list/gallery with headlines ("Earth-001 to Earth-999," "Earth-1000 to Earth-1999," and so on) to make it a bit easier to navigate.

        Loading editor
    • The issue with having only one page is that there are so many that the larger pages such as Spider-Man either don't show them or cause the page to freak out, if I remember correctly spider-man has too many to even show them all, maybe splitting them up by year groups as you suggest may fix that issue but I don't know.

        Loading editor
    • Rather than entirely new articles for the additional links, I think they should be subpages of the Hub, so Iron Man would have "Iron Man/Disambiguation", etc. and you can resolve the over burdened issues with characters like Captain America by having "Captain America/Disambiguation - Steven Rogers", "Captain America/Disambiguation - Samuel Wilson", "Captain America/Disambiguation - James Barnes", etc.

        Loading editor
    • AnnabellRice wrote: Rather than entirely new articles for the additional links, I think they should be subpages of the Hub, so Iron Man would have "Iron Man/Disambiguation", etc. and you can resolve the over burdened issues with characters like Captain America by having "Captain America/Disambiguation - Steven Rogers", "Captain America/Disambiguation - Samuel Wilson", "Captain America/Disambiguation - James Barnes", etc.

      Clever, so going back from the disambiguation page to the hub could be easier and could resolve problems to add links and stuff etc... as you said. Yup, I'm with that.

      I believe the focus should be on the main universes mostly for hub pages.

        Loading editor
    • I'm fine with that idea, it still doesn't fix the issue of Spider-Man, the number of alternate versions of just Peter Parker, is nearly 350, only 279 are shown on the page. Now I know we can increase the number of versions shown up to whatever we need but I thought the reason we hadn't was because increasing it seemed to break the page in some way when we did. At least that was what I was told when I raised this up to an admin last year.

        Loading editor
    • I believe the template should be redesigned or completely removed as its very hard to deal with, any other instances to cleanup the pages should be carried out with AWB (or maybe Wikia staff can help) although AWB will do, It's about deciding what and how to do it though, I hope a conclusive solution is found soon. This wiki is too good to not look formal and pretty.

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123 wrote: I'm fine with that idea, it still doesn't fix the issue of Spider-Man, the number of alternate versions of just Peter Parker, is nearly 350, only 279 are shown on the page. Now I know we can increase the number of versions shown up to whatever we need but I thought the reason we hadn't was because increasing it seemed to break the page in some way when we did. At least that was what I was told when I raised this up to an admin last year.

      Sure it does, you simply segment off the subpages like we did with List of Living Mutants for List of Living Mutants/Post-M-Day - Part I and List of Living Mutants/Post-M-Day - Part II.

      It's not perfect, but it'll be functional, easier to navigate between them and the Hub, and would not require existing links to disambiguation to necessarily need to be renamed.

        Loading editor
    • I didn't consider parts one and two, perfect fix

        Loading editor
    • Good discussion and too much stuff to comment on everything so I'll concentrate on the main ones. "Hub page" is a good proposal and I'd like to have one for at least characters featured on the main page. Those would have so few entries that we could design it to use tables (portal) without considering numbered entries and actually our current disambiguation template would be quite good for hub pages. I still would like to know more how it works on mobile which I think is important.

      However, that doesn't help us with problems with disambiguation pages because those are serving different purpose. In my opinion, disambiguation pages should just help navigating and we have seen that including more than just few images hinders that. So I would like those pages to be just text lists and galleries like we have now should be on separate pages. At minimum, we should change disambiguations to galleries instead of tables.

        Loading editor
    • I wouldn't like to see the removal of images from Disambiguation pages, sometimes the image is what draws me to investigate a character more and read the comic they are in. I agree changing to a gallery format may be the better option

        Loading editor
    • While portal boxes don't work well in mobile (or at all, at least on my phone), galleries don't work excellent either.

      I tried to check out both mock-ups on mobile, but couldn't. It automatically used the Oasis skin. So I had to use the preview mobile version function.

      The gallery works better on the mobile preview. The portal don't adjust to the width of the screen and the images don't remain cropped.

      There are a few questions I have regarding the use of galleries: Is it possible to remove the "Add a photo to this gallery"? For the hub, it's unaesthetic. Is there an attribute to smooth the borders of the images? I couldn't find one yet. Is there an attribute to make the image cropping use the top of the image as the center (Like portal boxes do)?

        Loading editor
    • There are a few questions I have regarding the use of galleries: Is it possible to remove the "Add a photo to this gallery"? For the hub, it's unaesthetic. Is there an attribute to smooth the borders of the images? I couldn't find one yet. Is there an attribute to make the image cropping use the top of the image as the center (Like portal boxes do)?

      Yes I have done it in the White Day Wiki for the content tab on the main page. You can check the Wikia manual for the gallery tag.

        Loading editor
    • Mrox2 wrote:

      There are a few questions I have regarding the use of galleries: Is it possible to remove the "Add a photo to this gallery"? For the hub, it's unaesthetic. Is there an attribute to smooth the borders of the images? I couldn't find one yet. Is there an attribute to make the image cropping use the top of the image as the center (Like portal boxes do)?

      Yes I have done it in the White Day Wiki for the content tab on the main page. You can check the Wikia manual for the gallery tag.

      The "hideaddbutton" attribute worked perfectly, thanks.

      I had already checked the help page for gallery tags, but couldn't find the answer for those questions.

        Loading editor
    • ADour wrote: The "hideaddbutton" attribute worked perfectly, thanks.

      I had already checked the help page for gallery tags, but couldn't find the answer for those questions.

      Yeah, Wikia need to update their help guides, some are really way too outdated, lol.

        Loading editor
    • I was able to get rounded corners and vertical alignment to top with CSS. Add following to your personal CSS page to see how it works.

      .wikia-gallery .gallery-image-wrapper {
          border-radius: 10px;
          overflow: hidden;
      }
      
      .wikia-gallery .thumbimage {
          margin-top: 0px !important;    
      }
      
        Loading editor
    • Works fine, thanks!

        Loading editor
    • So we have settled on Hub Pages do we go with portals or with gallery and the fix you suggest above, does every user have to change their own CSS page to view it like that?

      For disambiguation pages, how are we dealing with those, I liked Annabell's idea of Part One and Part Two, instead use of the template to the more gallery style proposed by Mrox2 as long as the images can be changed to look like portals for everyone.

        Loading editor
    • I'd go with the second one, the gallery code is very well optimized for mobile, anything self made will look horrible and out of proportions.

      Hub1:

      Hub1Test Mobile

      Hub1Test

      Hub2:

      Hub2Test Mobile

      Hub2Test

      Also in both versions the top images need a solution, they don't look good on mobile..

      Suggestion, maybe also add the character name under each version (a link).

      As for disambiguation, in my opinion just an Iron Man (disambiguation) page would do (even Marvel does it). Since Iron Man would become the main hub page.

        Loading editor
    • Again, I believe "Iron Man/Disambiguation" would be better, as subpages make it easier to navigate back to the hub and allow for further segmentation as needed in order to split lists of unwieldy length.

        Loading editor
    • I agree with Annabell's suggestions.

      Also, it appears everyone would indeed need to edit their CSS page to allow for the images in the gallery to have smooth borders. Additionally, every gallery is seen that way. It would be better to find another way to modify the border of the gallery's images.

        Loading editor
    • AnnabellRice wrote: Again, I believe "Iron Man/Disambiguation" would be better, as subpages make it easier to navigate back to the hub and allow for further segmentation as needed in order to split lists of unwieldy length.

      Yeah point valid, as long as its on its own page should be fine and I agree that a subpage is better, of course. I'm a big fan of sub-pages.

      ADour wrote: I agree with Annabell's suggestions.

      Also, it appears everyone would indeed need to edit their CSS page to allow for the images in the gallery to have smooth borders. Additionally, every gallery is seen that way. It would be better to find another way to modify the border of the gallery's images.

      There is a certain CSS you need to edit to make that code permanent for all users, I think it is MediaWiki:Common.css. Your Personal CSS Page is just for yourself, like the name states, its for things that you want to see on your end only or for testing.

      I think you should just customize the gallery tag border, a thicker, red / different color square isn't that so bad, is it? you can also remove borders completely within a tag, or even have test appear inside the image thumb.

        Loading editor
    • I know my personal CSS is my personal CSS page.

      We could edit the Wiki's CSS. However, we only want the hub's gallery to have smooth borders. I pretty sure there must be some kind of attribute that allows for that to be coded. Wikipedia's help page for syntaxis in the gallery tag has a lot of information from existing attributes missing.

        Loading editor
    • Visual Editor has various options that never appear here, you might wanna check this page out too.

        Loading editor
    • So on the rounded corner front, Wookiepedia has this which they took from somewhere else, i don't know if its any use, just trying to work out their use.

      EDIT: I think its just boxes and not images within them but i don't know

        Loading editor
    • I couldn't find anything of help, unfortunately.

        Loading editor
    • I messaged, Peteparker to see if he can shed light on how he got it for portal boxes and see if its transferable to galleries.

        Loading editor
    • CSS is indeed intended to be added to MediaWiki:Common.css and to be made div class so it affects only galleries we want.

        Loading editor
    • so we can make it so only hub galleries and disambiguation galleries have the rounded corners vi the css page?

        Loading editor
    • ADour wrote: Here's the hub proposal with the mock-up that Copeinator mentioned in the first message of this thread (originally posted in this discussion, which delves into some technicalities):

      User - ADour hub test

      I would also like to mention that I don't think using a gallery would be a good idea. The current display used in disambiguation templates makes every image have the same width (and height, if the image isn't landscape-oriented). And I think that makes it look much more tidy. You just need to compare the galleries from the disambigs of the DC Wiki with those from the Marvel wiki to see where I'm coming from.

      The only advantage I can think of that comes from using regular galleries is that they allow for an easy change in the order of the images, unlike the disambig boxes. If you add a new element in the middle of a box list, you need to edit one by one the number of the other boxes. If there was a way to code the current disambig boxes so they could operate in a similar way to galleries, it'd be perfect.

      I love your mock-up. MCU, MAU, Ultimate and a game version below the main 616 version. It makes sense, since these are the most major versions of any character. ;) Can we make this the standard across the board?

        Loading editor
    • Thank you, hopefully the hub idea will finally coming to fruition. It's funny to think the first time it was proposed I was against it.

        Loading editor
    • Well we will probably have more than just 4 characters there, depending on how many different characters we deem important.

      Also Edward Zachary Sunrose, this is in the moderators board so only admins and Moderators can post here unless given permission by one of us to do so, which Mrox2 had

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123 wrote: Well we will probably have more than just 4 characters there, depending on how many different characters we deem important.

      Also Edward Zachary Sunrose, this is in the moderators board so only admins and Moderators can post here unless given permission by one of us to do so, which Mrox2 had

      I'm sorry. I just saw it on the "Forum Activity" tab thing and clicked on it and commented here, I didn't realize it was in an out-of-bounds section.

        Loading editor
    • I assumed as much and its fine, just letting you know

        Loading editor
    • I don't believe we're necessarily leaning this way anyway, but since a couple people have mentioned it in passing I figured I'd clarify that I'm not in favor of it always being the Earth-616 iteration at the top when this policy eventually expands to more pages than the trending and popular.

      It makes sense to me that we strive to continue to highlight the common version of any given character most prominently, so Phil Coulson should be Phillip Coulson (Earth-199999), etc.

        Loading editor
    • Totally agreed. Did we ever decide on how many alternates should appear on the hub?

      For cases like Captain America, did we want to add a box below alternates for others who have used the name like the 8 characters that are currently just below the main one or remove those and put them in the related section, and just use the major one in the new related section.

      Also I realise what Edward was asking above, do we want to make this the standard for everyone, everyone, with more than a set number of alternatives, or only those who we have put or are currently on the main page.

      And we may have detoured away from Disambiguations themselves, Were People OK with them being gallery pages, if we can fix the curved borders, and to be called Iron Man/Disambiguation. With Part One and Part Two added in the case of those exceedingly huge characters? Then do we want to keep the same layout currently, with it just being a huge continuous list with non comic versions separated, or subdivide it, like Adour's suggestion somewhere up there of being 0-1000, 1000-9999 etc etc.

        Loading editor
    • I'd say start with those "trending" from the main page and then expand through those which are related to things that are "popular", but ultimately the goal should be to create hubs for as much as possible, because specifically the text descriptions we add to the hubs are what will increase our Search Engine Optimization, which the current lack-thereof is why our "just galleries" disambiguations are insufficient in getting eyeballs to view that which we've helped build.

      As for the numbers of alternates, I'm not sure it should be a specific number, rather it would hopefully be flexible enough that we can add whatever makes the most sense for each character, because as you said, Captain America is shared by more than a dozen Earth-616 individuals, so it will need to be far more extensive than say Blink who only has a few meaningful variants.

      In terms of division, it shouldn't be such a small range that it requires absurd numbers of subpages, I mean off the top of my head there's at least 4290001 Earths (can't think of a higher reality number) so if you broke it down per thousand as suggested, that's potentially almost 4300 subpages of disambiguations per character, which is surely untenable, so it makes more sense to me to look for a sensible split in terms of the actual number of iterations on the subpage rather than something based upon the numerical range of realities they're from.

        Loading editor
    • I think we could start with eight alternates. In the case of Captain America, considering there are only two relevant people out of, like, six or something who have taken up his mantle, Bucky Barnes and Sam Wilson, we could feature them in the "Related" section, together with Captain America's Shield.

      What I meant by breaking down the disambig is doing so with subheadings, not subpages. We will break it down in subpages if we find ourselves with a little bit way too many alternates, like it happens to Spider-Man or Iron Man.

        Loading editor
    • Okay, that makes sense. I definitely like the idea of like two to four "Spider-Man/Disambiguation - Peter Parker - Part (_)" subpages and those would have a TOC broken down by reality ranges.

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123 wrote: this is in the moderators board so only admins and Moderators can post here

      It was first created as such but I removed that from board introduction based on this thread. So every contributor can freely share their opinions and knowledge, as they should.

        Loading editor
    • I apologise, I never noticed the change

        Loading editor
    • Oh, ok. Yay. ^_^ Well, could I make one suggestion? I do like that the worlds are in order of number... But I'd like to suggest one of those slider tab things (I don't know the proper term for it), that could switch the order from numerical to the order introduced (like for Coulson, 199999 would come before 311, 616 and 12041 as opposed to 311 being first, then 616, then 12041. I know that 199999 Coulson is the main version, so he'd be at the top, but this was the first example to come to mind.)

        Loading editor
    • So a choice between chronology appeareance and numerical? I'm not a big fan of that mostly because 99% of the time, I'm not sure people care about the chronological order of characters, some MCU characters and TV show characters like X-23 are the only exceptions i can think of

        Loading editor
    • We can't even get the chronological appearance list to work properly on the majority of appearances categories, so in addition to having questionable usefulness, I'm not so sure it's even feasible to try and work such a mechanism into the reworked disambiguations.

        Loading editor
    • This is probably unrelated (and off-topic) but can any one of the admins possibly add "Discussions" in the "Connect with us" section of the navigation bar? I just thought it's essential now (kind of).

        Loading editor
    • Off-topic indeed, but thanks for reminding. Link is added.

        Loading editor
    • So is this discussion done and reached a consensus on Hubs and Disambiguation pages, or do we want more input?

        Loading editor
    • Bump in order to continue Discussion

        Loading editor
    • Unless people reply disagreeing with this then by next week I will start creating Hub pages for Main characters, and seeing what a gallery style disambiguation page looks like for some major characters.

        Loading editor
    • To be clear, we're going to use the User:ADour/HubTest2 model, right? The only problem with it is that the character logo doesn't look good on mobile. Other than that, it doesn't seem to have any other problems with portability.

      We should also start with the planification of which characters will be getting hubs, so we can go into their creation with full force.

      So far, I think the obvious candidates are:

      • Iron Man
      • Captain America
      • Thor
      • Deadpool
      • Spider-Man
      • Deadpool
      • Wolverine
      • Captain Marvel (Danvers)
      • Black Widow
      • Doctor Strange
      • Cyclops
      • Jean Grey
      • Black Panther
        Loading editor
    • I've been very busy to reply, but personally I'd say go for it.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, but we'd need to change the Css on those galleries to fix them to how we want them to look.

      I would suggest its need for any character thats over the 236 alternates character we have the limit set to. So that and other big characters includes:

      • Mister Fantastic
      • Thing
      • Human Torch
      • Invisible Girl
      • Hulk
      • Daredevil
      • Punisher

      (Personally any character who has a major role in a marvel movie should probably get one but thats a broad subject)

        Loading editor
    •   Loading editor
    •   Loading editor
    • Mrox2 wrote: Popular pages

      Yes, I went through the past month of that and then listed the associated disambiguations that had more than a handful of alternates.

        Loading editor
    • THat feels like a good list to start with.

        Loading editor
    • So I made a start with Spider-Man Heres the Hub User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man and heres the dismabiguation pages Spider-Man/User:Copeinator123/Disambiguation_-_Part_1 and User:Copeinator123/Disambiguation_-_Part_2

      They need to be converted to galleries instead of disambiguation, but we need to decide how we want to spread them over the 2 pages.

        Loading editor
    • I think it maybe a good idea to use Tab view for different versions of character. For example for Spider-Man it could be something like that:

      <tabview>
      Spider-Man/Peter Parker|Peter Parker
      Spider-Man/Miles Morales|Miles Morales
      Spider-Man/Otto Octavius|Otto Octavius (Supperior Spider-Man)
      Spider-Man/Miguel O'Hara|Miguel O'Hara
      Spider-Man/Others|Others
      </tabview>

      As for splitting alternate reality versions into parts, I think what only characters with some history should be placed on the main disambiguation page, while all others should be placed on subpage. For most characters such versions are from developed realities like Ultimate, MC2, Eart X, Mutant X, Age of Apocalypse, MCU, etc. I'm also think that pages like Spider-Man/Peter Parker should include only Peter Parker's versions that were Spide-Man, so no Captain Universe, Lizard, Paviitr Prabhakar, Penelope Parker, etc.

        Loading editor
    • The big versions are for the Hub page, splitting them into then even smaller appearances over the two pages may make it difficult to decide who should go on each page. I do like the tab idea, it may get confusing with characters like Ben Reilly and Otto Octavius who spend more time under there other alter egos so we would have both those characters under two seperate pages.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think it's necessary to divide the disambig for the different people that used the alias. The Spider-Man disambig should be used for Peter Parker alone, with the disambigs for other people under the mask linked in the others. Pretty much the same way it is currently.

      Tabs could be useful to divide the alternate versions by different types of media (comics, TV, movies, games), plus the "Teams," "Others" and "Related" sections.

        Loading editor
    • Let's please not get bogged down in what qualifies as "Peter Parker". I don't see why Peter Parker (Earth-65), Peter Parquagh (Earth-311), Pavitr Prabhakar (Earth-50101), etc. should not all be included on his disambiguation.

      That being said, I don't believe shared alias Hubs should necessarily be limited to a single character, that is to say I still feel that the Spider-Man Hub should include links to disambiguations for not only Peter Parker, but also Miles Morales, Miguel O'Hara, etc., just like your Iron Man Hub example features a link to War Machine.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think we should have any problem with alternate reality analogues like Peter Parquagh, Pavitr Prabhakar or Patton Parnel.

        Loading editor
    • Delightful.

        Loading editor
    • So next step to convert it all to gallery style, make a few more then switch them to there proper names.

        Loading editor
    • So heres one of them converted over to galleries instead of disambiguation template. User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man/Movies. Thoughts?

        Loading editor
    • Can we try the following syntaxis?

      <gallery orientation="portrait" widths="150" captionalign="center" bordercolor="#fffff" perrow="4" hideaddbutton="true">

        Loading editor
    • It does.

        Loading editor
    • Sorry, copy-pasted the wrong one, I meant to write this one:

      <gallery widths="150" orientation="square" spacing="small" captionalign="center" bordercolor="#fffff" perrow="4" hideaddbutton="true">

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123
      Copeinator123 removed this reply because:
      I was wrong
      21:55, July 3, 2016
      This reply has been removed
    • So with this tab feature I was wondering if we even needed to seperate the disambiguation page onto another page. instead have it like this User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man2

        Loading editor
    • Personally, I'd like to keep the hub separate from the full disambig.

        Loading editor
    • Copeinator123 wrote: So I made a start with Spider-Man Heres the Hub User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man and heres the dismabiguation pages Spider-Man/User:Copeinator123/Disambiguation_-_Part_1 and User:Copeinator123/Disambiguation_-_Part_2

      They need to be converted to galleries instead of disambiguation, but we need to decide how we want to spread them over the 2 pages.

      I think that disambiguation should also include Tobey Maguire Spider-Man and Andrew Garfield Spider-Man, since they are also iconic iterations of the character.

        Loading editor
    • I think we should settle for the most recent version of the movie character and I combined, Others and Related into One section

      User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man/Related.

      Opinions?

        Loading editor
    • I think you'll have to rename the User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man/Earth-0 to Earth-50,000 page. Earth-0 isn't an actual reality designation, just an alias. A TRN will be assigned to it.

        Loading editor
    • The Many-Angled One wrote: I think you'll have to rename the User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man/Earth-0 to Earth-50,000 page. Earth-0 isn't an actual reality designation, just an alias. A TRN will be assigned to it.

      Good catch, we've previously agreed to move Earth-0 to Earth-TRN566, it's simply not been done yet.

      Officially either Earth-1 or Earth-001 are the lowest number, I'd opt for the latter since it's more significant.

        Loading editor
    • so no other issues, because i'm making a start on main alternatives and once thats done i'll move it in place

        Loading editor
    • The disambiguation pages with just a few alternates stays the way they are right? For example; Miles Morales.

        Loading editor
    • our aim for now is the major characters under the popular pages linked above by annabell

        Loading editor
    • Eventually even Disambiguations like Miles Morales will be converted to Hubs though, because the goal is not only aesthetic, but also function, and by adding new aspects like the text summaries in place of the existing format, it increases our search engine optimization, so they're simply not the current priority; however, we'll get there in time.

        Loading editor
    • In the case of realities that have a TRN, will they have their own disambiguation page (something like Spider-Man/Earth-TRN001 to Earth-TRN999)?

        Loading editor
    • We can add whatever tab pages people want, combine current or whatever

        Loading editor
    • Does someone want to make the hub pages for other characters as converting Spider-Man into gallery form is taking longer than I anticipated

        Loading editor
    • I'll try to help with Iron Man's. I'm pretty busy this week, so I'll see if I can.

        Loading editor
    • I was more talking about making the hub pages themselves and not the full disambig's, so we can decide on what alternates and stuff should appear on them.

        Loading editor
    • ADour
      ADour removed this reply because:
      Wrong thread.
      16:28, July 6, 2016
      This reply has been removed
    • Isn't the hub what requires deciding what should appear in it and not the full disambig?

        Loading editor
    • thats what I mean.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not following you.

        Loading editor
    • Let me start again, someone should start making the Hub pages for all the characters in the list above. Since we need to decide what is written and who should go on there. The disambigs just need converting so no real thought goes into those.

        Loading editor
    • Okay, we're still in planning phase. Got it. I'll try to make some time to brainstorm the hubs for Captain America and possibly others like Deadpool, Black Panther or Doctor Strange.

        Loading editor
    • Sorry this has been months without actually doing anything, I couldn't get it to work the way I wanted, and got busy so I gave up, now free again to focus on design

      So depending on what people prefer it seems its going to be done in certain ways

      1) Use Tabs and the currently used |Alternate1 and separate them every 150 or so on different tabs.

      2) Use Tabs and galleries, just have the images be all different sizes, because it seems that with tabs you can't control how the galleries look and it defaults.

      3) Don't use tabs but have 1 single page of images that are all square.

      Things of Note, round edges on images isn't really feasible on galleries without a lot of messng around in code and stuff that I am unfamiliar with.

      Galleries do not pick the top of the image to focus on, but the centre meaning certain images will have to be cropped.

      Let me know which people would prefer, before I just choose which ever one i prefer.

      Examples of 1 and 2 can be found here: User:Copeinator123/Spider-Man/Disambiguation

      Edit this and the correseponding tab pages as you wish to try out different things

        Loading editor
    • Hi!

      The subject of the disambiguation have appeared once again.

      The hub proposal presumably won't be ready for some time from now.

      In the meantime, should we expand the option that we discussed at some time and applied for Captain Marvel and expand it to others ?:

      Sorry if it's not exactly the same subject (even if related).

        Loading editor
    • I would suggest having the characters code name as a disambiguation page that directs characters to the different individuals who has gone under that name. The most current one(s) get top billing followed by the others.

      Code Name -> A list of all the individuals who went under that code name, one link for each individual (first name/last name as applicable) with no universe designations. Each link redirects to

      First Name/Last Name -> Gives a detailed list of all the alternate reality iterations of that character.

      So if you go to Spider-Man

      It would give you the option of choosing Peter Parker, Miles Morales, Otto Octavius, basically everyone who has operated under the name Spider-Man would have a link on this page

      When you go to Peter Parker, then that breaks down all the versions of Peter Parker, regardless of if he was Spider-Man or not. Ditto for Miles, Otto, and everyone else.

      As for related characters, (IE: Anyone who is not specifically named something) they should be listed in a /Related field. IE: Spider-Man/Related, which can be organized into more specific categories as needed.

        Loading editor
    • I will say that I like the above for breaking down our disambigs for certain characters. It would work very well for code names like Hobgoblin, a name that could refer to no fewer than 14 people, but it still does not lend itself to the main issue of page density. Even now, the Spider-Man disambig features mainly Peter Parker characters in the Alternate Reality/Video Game/Movie/Television sections. If we were to create a Peter Parker disambig, we'd still have over 300 alternate versions, which still breaks our template limits. And that is truly what our solutions to this long-running issue need to address.

        Loading editor
    • Spencerz wrote: If we were to create a Peter Parker disambig, we'd still have over 200 alternate versions, which still breaks our template limits. And that is truly what our solutions to this long-running issue need to address.

      Which is why utilizing tabber on the subpages was suggested.

        Loading editor
    • AnnabellRice wrote: Which is why utilizing tabber on the subpages was suggested.

      Which sounds like a great idea, don't get me wrong. But as Undoniel pointed out in his reply earlier this month, it's no where near completion; it's coming close to a year since that mock-up was posted.

      My response was posited more towards what Undoniel and Naustiated brought up in these last two posts. Breaking up pages with rotating code names like Captain Marvel or Venom is a great idea, but they only slightly address the main issue of having so many pages.

        Loading editor
    • I started to make one for Spider-Man, but I ran into some issues in trying to make it over here. People wanted to move away from using the disambiguation template to galleries and I couldn't get tabs and galleries to work nor get the images to line up.

        Loading editor
    • Also I couldn't get tabs to be able to be edited easily without knowing the destination page of the tab in the first place, I will get back to it soon. It was just frustrating me too much

        Loading editor
    • Nausiated wrote: As for related characters, (IE: Anyone who is not specifically named something) they should be listed in a /Related field. IE: Spider-Man/Related, which can be organized into more specific categories as needed.

      Without talking about the pages requiring the subpages, it is important to respect relevancy on this section. For example, we have Minister Marvel (Earth-616) in Captain Marvel, when his place is definitively only in Mar-Vell.

      The separation into many pages of individual people must also allow us to separate the others and related and re-attach them to the characters they are related, when they're specifically related to the individual and not to the alias (but I assume all of you think pretty much the same way).


      We can vote at least on the first part (what I call "how we handled Captain Marvel") of what Nausiated described (in a way clearer way than I tried):

      Nausiated wrote: I would suggest having the characters code name as a disambiguation page that directs characters to the different individuals who has gone under that name. The most current one(s) get top billing followed by the others.

      Code Name -> A list of all the individuals who went under that code name, one link for each individual (first name/last name as applicable) with no universe designations. Each link redirects to

      First Name/Last Name -> Gives a detailed list of all the alternate reality iterations of that character.

      So if you go to Spider-Man

      It would give you the option of choosing Peter Parker, Miles Morales, Otto Octavius, basically everyone who has operated under the name Spider-Man would have a link on this page

      When you go to Peter Parker, then that breaks down all the versions of Peter Parker, regardless of if he was Spider-Man or not. Ditto for Miles, Otto, and everyone else.

      That will address the general issue without forcing a decision on the following part of subpages, new forms of pages, and even if it doesn't solve the issue of having too many links in a disambiguation, it will slightly diminish the problem (better than nothing), time for us to create the model Copeinator and others are creating.

      Whether in favor or against (or in the middle) the proposition, don't hesitate to add new arguments, not only in order to support your position but to help reach the best solution.

      ADour:
      AnnabellRice: Yes/split
      Artful Dodger:
      KalKent:
      Mrkermit:
      Nausiated:
      Spencerz: Yes/split
      The Many-Angled One: Yes/split
      Undoniel: Yes/split
      Copeinator123: Yes/split
      Hufflepuffgirl28:
      LoveWaffle:
      Monolith616:
      MysteryScooby:
      Nurdboy42: Yes/split
      Shabook: Yes/split
      SunGodKizaru: Yes/split

      I hope nobody thinks I'm rushing the issue, because it's been a while, and nothing better that a vote to settle the change and allow us to progress further.

        Loading editor
    • I vote split shared codename disambiguations like we did with Captain Marvel and Ms. Marvel already.

        Loading editor
    • I'm favor of it as well (having been the one who stole borrowed this idea to use in the Ghost Rider disambiguation page), so banana split.

        Loading editor
    • Undoniel wrote: I hope nobody thinks I'm rushing the issue, because it's been a while, and nothing better that a vote to settle the change and allow us to progress further.

      Totally agreed with that point, it should be a mandatory thing on all discussions once points have been presented.

      As for the current vote, my vote is also Yes/split, for all reasons mentioned above, and because it is a model that has been proved to work (at least for the time being).

        Loading editor
    • I agree with you guys, my vote is Yes/split.

        Loading editor
    • Definitely Split

        Loading editor
    • Someone want to give me a tl;dr about what we're voting on?

        Loading editor
    • Undoniel wrote:

      Nausiated wrote: I would suggest having the characters code name as a disambiguation page that directs characters to the different individuals who has gone under that name. The most current one(s) get top billing followed by the others.

      Code Name -> A list of all the individuals who went under that code name, one link for each individual (first name/last name as applicable) with no universe designations. Each link redirects to

      First Name/Last Name -> Gives a detailed list of all the alternate reality iterations of that character.

      So if you go to Spider-Man

      It would give you the option of choosing Peter Parker, Miles Morales, Otto Octavius, basically everyone who has operated under the name Spider-Man would have a link on this page

      When you go to Peter Parker, then that breaks down all the versions of Peter Parker, regardless of if he was Spider-Man or not. Ditto for Miles, Otto, and everyone else.

        Loading editor
    • Sorry to comment this in the middle of a vote, but has anyone thought how this will be applied to codenames shared by a bunch of related characters, that also happen to be used by unrelated characters?

      The case of Tarantula comes to my mind, and I bet there are more.

        Loading editor
    • So like Ghost Rider? I'm fine with that.

      Yes/Split.

        Loading editor
    • Shabook wrote: Sorry to comment this in the middle of a vote, but has anyone thought how this will be applied to codenames shared by a bunch of related characters, that also happen to be used by unrelated characters?

      The case of Tarantula comes to my mind, and I bet there are more.

      Yes, and I think it should apply pretty much the same way. For Tarantula, I would not put a "main character" until one truly rise, but yes, it would be (like it is currently) a disambiguation liking to individuals and individuals' disambiguation pages.

      Nurdboy42 wrote: So like Ghost Rider? I'm fine with that.

      Exactly like Ghost Rider.

        Loading editor
    • I'm going to amend myself into the voting list and say Yes/Split.

        Loading editor
    • Would the split proposition apply to every disambig of an alias used by more than one person regardless of the level of prominence?

        Loading editor
    • Spencerz wrote: I'm going to amend myself into the voting list and say Yes/Split.

      Woops, you weren't on the list I copy-pasted from a previous vote, my bad !

      ADour wrote: Would the split proposition apply to every disambig of an alias used by more than one person regardless of the level of prominence?

      Good question. I believe it would be a blurry delineation based on the relevancy of the process based on the mass of content. If we need a clear choice, I would think of "on every", for the sake of consistency, but it would lack relevancy at that point.

        Loading editor
    • In the case, of Ghost Rider, it makes sense considering how many of them have been over the years, and not simply because of the nature of the mantle, but rather in the sense that, for example, Ketch is considered by many people as "their" Ghost Rider.

      In other cases, splitting disambigs for characters like Iron Man is unnecessary. For example, Rhodey did take over as Iron Man a couple of times, but it was temporary and didn't reach the same level of relevancy. The Iron Man is still Tony Stark.

        Loading editor
    • Iron Man should be split as well. What will make Tony Stark be the Iron Man will be the fact that he is in the main character spot. The purpose of the proposal allows to separate others/related between alias-related others/related, and individual-related others/related. Also I don't like to already creating exceptions to the idea, especially for case where it fit.

      And in any case, any changes can be changed back (and the "other mains" are nearby), so if (for some times to be sure of the relevancy) Rhodes goes back to Iron Man and Tony Stark became something else, like War Machine, it will not have irrelevancy to present Rhodes as the main Iron Man. It will be depending to the level of relevancy at the moment based on importance of the change (an official switch of names for example, opposed to a temporary switch of a few issues).

        Loading editor
    • The first reason is understandable, the second is based a bit too much on "if."

        Loading editor
    • The example is based on too much "if", because I don't see Rhodes taking the Iron Man title over Stark any time soon.

      In any case, Tony Stark will likely be almost all of the time on the main character place, and always in the mains (if not THE main).

        Loading editor
    • We've almost reached majority of voters, all in favor, but we lack 1 vote to have either majority participation or agreement.

      What are the rules (if we ever established some) on the votes and their end (number of voters, time since the vote was proposed) ?

      Currently:
      ADour:
      AnnabellRice: Yes/split
      Artful Dodger:
      KalKent:
      Mrkermit:
      Nausiated:
      Spencerz: Yes/split
      The Many-Angled One: Yes/split
      Undoniel: Yes/split
      Copeinator123: Yes/split
      Hufflepuffgirl28:
      LoveWaffle:
      Monolith616:
      MysteryScooby:
      Nurdboy42: Yes/split
      Shabook: Yes/split
      SunGodKizaru: Yes/split

        Loading editor
    • Yes/split

        Loading editor
    • Undoniel wrote: What are the rules (if we ever established some) on the votes and their end (number of voters, time since the vote was proposed) ?

      Sorry for getting out of topic, but as an answer to that, as far as I'm aware, there are no rules. I proposed establishing a time limit, but it was ignored in the practice. If you're interested, you can check our voting policy at the MCU Wiki for inspiration...

        Loading editor
    • Shabook wrote:

      Undoniel wrote: What are the rules (if we ever established some) on the votes and their end (number of voters, time since the vote was proposed) ?

      Sorry for gtting out of topic, but as an answer to that, as far as I'm aware, there are no rules. I proposed establishing a time limit, but it was ignored in the practice. If you're interested, you can check our voting policy at the MCU Wiki for inspiration...

      Basically it goes on until someone eventually either gets frustrated at lack of participation and drops the subject or they get frustrated at lack of participation and declare whatever the majority at the time to be final.

      That being said, this one has already reached more than half in favor, so it's a consensus even if everyone else suddenly voted opposed.

        Loading editor
    • AnnabellRice wrote: Basically it goes on until someone eventually either gets frustrated at lack of participation and drops the subject or they get frustrated at lack of participation and declare whatever the majority at the time to be final.

      With this particular vote seemingly settled, I want to comment that I've always wondered why deciding policies based on somebody's "frustration level" is such a "normalcy" in this wiki. But I guess that trying to solve the overall situation would lead to nowhere and getting even more frustrated.

      Having individual votes for every tiny subject thrice a week without solving the issue is like trying a broken leg with one tiny little band aid at a time.

        Loading editor
    • Admin apathy has always been a running theme here for as long as I've been editing. I don't know that it's a deliberate thing, but no matter how well a debate on a topic goes, follow-through is rarely achieved, and we've never found a proper solution for it.

        Loading editor
    • Yes for the split if you mean (sorry, skimming) Codename/Real Name pages.

      As for the order for who gets the top spot, I think the obvious solution is to put the most current and prominent person who is carrying the title. (So Captain Marvel would have Carol Danvers at the top of the page, whereas Ms. Marvel would have Kamela Khan, Ghost Rider would be Robbie Rayes, Iron Man would presently be Victor von Doom -- as opposed to Riri Williams as she is technically Iron Heart) I think the qualifier for this should be that the "top spot" characters should be actively appearing in a title during the current year, as soon as they are not, they are bumped.

      However, having a central focus might always work so it should be adaptable to include any characters who might be using the name concurrently (Peter Parker and Miles Morales for example)

      Perhaps a better method of organization for the name pages, I think we could do a better job organizing it a little better. I think if we organize things by code name in each page it would present a cleaner look.

      Carol Danvers is a great example. (and i'll use Peter Parker when it doesn't work as an example)

      Top of the page: The Earth-616 version. (Presently) Identified as Captain Marvel

      Then followed by a list of the most prominent codenames she has gone under. These would be organized by what code name the character last went under in their respective identities followed by a catch-all for random ones.

      Under this idea Carol Danvers would be broken down like this:

      1) The most prominent version of her (typically Earth-616, although I think the qualifier should be where they have appeared the most. So perhaps that will sort out issues with MCU/Comic book prominence)

      2) A list of alternate reality versions under their current code name (Regardless of number, if applicable) So in this case, Captain Marvel.

      3) The next most prominent code name (Ms. Marvel)

      4) Third most (If applicable) (I guess this would probably be Binary)

      5) Fourth most (I/A) (I'm suspecting Warbird in this case)

      --- And so on for every major codename. I figure if they have 5+ alternates it warrants its own subheading ----

      6) Powerless (if applicable), basically every reality where they have no powers or code name at all. (I think this is the next most logical next step as many alternates have no powers or operate on a legal name basis)

      7) Other identities (A catch all for all of the random unique code names for the same character that exist across the multiverse that have five or less usages)

      8) Biological Identity - Although I think a less abrasive identifier could be figured out here. But I think this will solve the issue of characters who are the same being only their name is spelled differently due to different ethnicity, marriage, alternate spellings, and even gender swapped. Basically, if it is supposed to be the same person with some different characteristics that change their biological identity in some way, they would go here. I can't think of anything specific for Carol Danvers, but I think this would help for someone like Peter Parker who has versions across the multiverse who have different spellings to their name (due to different ethnicity, existing in another era other than the "modern age" and so on) or genders, and even realities where they're not human (so realities where it's basically the same character only the dominant species is gorillas, dinosaurs, jeeps, whatever) which should cover all the anthropomorphic characters and odd balls. However, in the case where there is more than on of these alternates (IE: the multiple versions of Peter Proker) it should link to a disambiguation page for that characters legal name (So a disambig for Peter Porker) to clear up clutter.

      9) Clones/Replicants/Impostors Etc. - Would be a catch all for all characters who are not alternate reality versions but duplicates in some other way. Clones, unidentified impostors (like the random Skrull Insurgents during Secret Invasion that are not identified by name) To be clear, this would be for anyone who can't be identified by anything else other than the characters name. So "Carol Danvers" is the only thing we could possibly identify them by.

      On Movies/TV/Video Games/Other Media

      I have never been much of a fan for giving this its own heading. Frankly I find it a redundancy since most realities usually identify that it's a movie/tv show/video game. Also, you know, it should be pretty obvious looking at the thumbnail.

      This might cause some problems with the template limits on how many characters you can fit in a specific category.. Is that still a problem?... I think that if an identifier is getting too big (IE: Peter Parkers who operate as Spider-Man) once we've reach the absolute limit we have a link at the bottom that says "More..."

      Which brings me to my next point:

      Sorting/Order

      Because it's always going to come down to which version gets more prominence. Honestly, the reality index exists for a reason. Therefor, all versions should be sorted in the best numerical order possible for that version of the character. Earth-1, Earth-2, Earth-3 Etc.

      The breakdown would list indexed realities first, then followed by TRNs.

        Loading editor
    • Whole voting is really unnecessary as nobody has opposed the idea to split or the use of real names on disambig pages. We have already done that on many occasions so I changed the policy to comply with that. I think that this thing needs just editing work and if some problems arise, we can discuss and define the rules more.

      Shabook wrote:

      If you're interested, you can check our voting policy at the MCU Wiki for inspiration...

      Excellent policy page which I would accept for us as it is. Even the time limits are roughly what I have been used. We should open a separate discussion about this topic. In the meantime, as we don't have any rules how to end discussions, it's best to just boldly proceed and act on it when it feels appropriate. One of our problems is, in the line with this thread, ambiguity of the proposition. We should learn to propose an actual change to a policy text instead of just throwing ideas around.

        Loading editor
    • Mrkermit wrote: We should learn to propose an actual change to a policy text instead of just throwing ideas around.

      Perhaps, but that would be way easier if all policies reflected the current status of articles...

        Loading editor
    • Yes, it would. Problem is that policies haven't been updated which has lead to this problem. One more reason to do that in the future. Just remember that current status don't necessarily reflect the community consensus, it could be just laborious effort of one editor. ;)

        Loading editor
    • Mrkermit wrote: Whole voting is really unnecessary as nobody has opposed the idea to split or the use of real names on disambig pages.

      At least now we're sure.

      So, adopted with 10 votes for on 17 potential voters. One good thing done. I'll try to read your message in the next days Nausiated, but the little I've read seems good to me.

        Loading editor
    • So, are we free to split pages now? Cause I want to take a crack at Viper/Madame Hydra.

        Loading editor
    • Nurdboy42 wrote: So, are we free to split pages now? Cause I want to take a crack at Viper/Madame Hydra.

      Yes, we are.

        Loading editor
    • Awesome. I'll go do that then.

        Loading editor
    • Hi!

      Sorry, wrong thread but I can't find the precise one I'm looking for, and this one is directly related: Can someone point to me the thread for discussing the new disambiguation template?

      It is currently being implemented but it automatically removed everything on a field after the first/main link, which make the disambiguation less useful. (It doesn't cause any harm on the likes of Asmodeus where the descriptor (not sure I'm using the right term here) is in the first link, but many pages have the descriptors in the second link, and are as such not really intuitive (a good example could be Asura: [1]

      Thanks in advance! Have a good night.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+