Template talk:Miniatures nav

I think this nav would benefit from less images and more structure. It's really hard to find anything in it at the moment. - anja 14:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the images are completely unnecessary and just cause long loading times on mini pages. What would be better would be structure relating to acquisition rather than the text colour (which really has zero baring on rarity) eg. First year, second year, in game methods, and others, similar to the categorisation on the miniature page. --Lemming 16:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposal here --Lemming 16:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm all for that proposal. — Rappy 21:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

But it does not really improve the finding of a miniature if you don't know how to get it.. poke | talk 06:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposal looks good to me. -- Hong 07:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Different color, maybe? Puke orange doesn't strike me as cool (yes, I'm aware it's the currently used color).

Style is fine on the proposal. -Auron 07:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Poke the only other option really is to just have one list and alphabetise it. I can't think of any other way of sorting them apart from these three. I think we use the orange as that is the colour of the item infobox. --Lemming 13:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Bah, I knew I should have watchlisted this :P Do we need the big margins/wraps? Lots of whitespace. Also, I'm in favor for set widths, relative width often mess up the design. What looks good on your screen looks horrible on mine etc, because of different linebreaks and similar. - anja 21:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer to see the images, but I don't care a whole lot either way. Calor 21:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not bothered about the images either way but personally I've never really liked using a percentage for table widths, I'm guessing that is what Anja means regarding relative width. --Kakarot 21:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I basically copied the old version but without the images with relation to the widths and stuff. --Lemming 21:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I did some tweaking, tell me what you think. - anja 22:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks good to me. --Lemming 22:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks good Anja, although maybe use 700px rather than 650px? That way the Bone Dragon, Polar Bear and Vizu & Zhed aren't on a line all on their own making it take more space. --Kakarot 23:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

will we change it back (at best with 19x19px icons) as far as we have uploaded all icons? —ZerphaThe Improver 16:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

It was never about having the right icons, the problem was they took unnecessarily long to load and they don't really help navigation, they just cluttered it up if anything. I can understand having them on smaller navboxes like sweet-tooth, but here they just serve very little purpose. --Lemming 16:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Well, they could help me a bit and i liked them, but i agree with your arguments. —ZerphaThe Improver 16:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Huh, I nearly forgot that. poke | talk 21:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Bloated

This "navbar" is more like a "navblock" or "navsection" instead. It's too cluttered with links and the size of it feels rather intimidating on miniature pages, since it actually takes up more space than the content on a miniature itself. I would like to suggest that it be split into multiple navbars ala the location navbars. Here's an example for how the first birthday navbar would look. I just think that since we do link to Miniature multiple times on each miniature page, it feels quite redundant to repeat the nicely structured tables and try to compact them into as small a box as possible. -- ab.er.rant 09:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

hmmm - I'm thinking about modifying the collapsible tables script to add a tabbed feature... :P poke | talk 11:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

That is much nicer, should probably be used on the historic content one too. --Lemming 16:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

yeah, that's a good idea, both for the miniatures and the historical content nav (having all collapsed there by default is a bit annoying) —ZerphaThe Improver 16:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I will make some tab script... :P poke | talk 16:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Merging categories: Promotional and Special Editions

I will merge the two miniature categories Promotional and Special Editions as there is not such a big difference there as between other categories. Miniatures of both of these types can be attained by purchasing a product outside of the game. Also, having a separate category just for Kuunavang and Varesh seems to be a waste. If you disagree with this change, please discuss it here. --Adul 19:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and also merged the aforementioned categories with Others. --Adul 19:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Bloated "in-game"

I would like to separate those in-game rewards that are always available (e.g. from Traveler's Gifts, reward chests, or WiK) from those that are event-related (e.g. previous Canthan New Year, Gaile's minis, and Wintersday). Would anyone object? See Miniatures#In-game reward for how those could be divided.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)