Category talk:Characters Introduced Templates

Unnecessary
Not only are the templates not in the standard five columns or less design, add useless information to the arc pages, are mostly the island gallery, and were added without a discussion, but they also brake the layout of the pages. They are especially unnecessary in filler arc since most introduction there are for this arc alone. If the information is deemed necessary, I suggest adding the debut portion to the arc box. Rhavkin (talk) 21:37, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Agreed on most points. Technically, it was discussed but only briefly in Discord and DMs, which is a bad practice of circumventing wiki discussions. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 14:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

So now what? If it was discussed and approved I still think the debut portion to the arc box is preferable. I know we barely use this as is but it is better then a gallery. Rhavkin (talk) 05:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

The gallery template was modified by an Admin to allow 6 columns when necessary in order to help shrink the size of some of the galleries. It's not ignoring the standard, it's just adding on to the existing standard but the templates would work whether they had 5 columns or 6. The templates do not add useless information to the arc pages, and while there wasn't a wiki-held discussion for them there was permission obtained by the admins for them. They add to the layout of the pages, they do not break them. I'd actually consider them especially necessary for filler arcs in giving an overview of characters introduced in those filler arcs. I do not think that simply relegating the information to a section on the infobox would be sufficient, and I'll be happy to go into why if we need to discuss it. Damage3245 (talk) 22:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Galleries are used to show character with a shared traits like crew or ability; being in the same arc is neither. The collapsible infobox section is not only a better location page layout-wise, but also an already existing wiki tool for the purpose of debuts. I have no reason to believe those galleries and edits were not approved since both Nesha confirmed it and no admin undid those edits, but the fact of the matter is that if that discussion was held in a wiki forum, other might have been able to comment, and the admins might reconsidered or if the debut tab was suggested, it might have been selected instead of galleries. Until an admin comment in this open discussion, and the majority choose to keep the galleries I would have to accept it.

BTW, I am also against the usage of the galleries in the new Antagonists page. the generalization of galleries makes the pages look like some users pages, and give the wiki an armatureistic look. You explained way you think the arc introduction characters (Hopefully it will only be characters) should featured on the arc page, but not way you think galleries are the way to do it. Rhavkin (talk) 18:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

There was an alternative presentation for displaying the characters introduced here as a first option, but the existing Gallery template was found to be superior for the job.

As for why I think Galleries are the suitable choice here at all instead of a simple list, I think the advantages are pretty good. In the gallery format we don't just have a name displayed but a picture of the character for clearer identification. It's one thing to look at a list of a couple dozen characters and try to find the one you're looking for, but in a gallery this process becomes much easier as you have visual of the character as well. The galleries also have an advantage in that they're displayed directly to the viewer on the page and the viewer doesn't have to open up a tab on the infobox every single time they want to look at the list of introduced characters. The galleries can also present additional information to the reader instead of just names and faces; the Wano arc template for example is divided into the different Acts of the arc to organize the information better, and additional formatting is used to signify if a character is anime-original, or introduced in just a flashback. I think the usage of the galleries (which are actually quite good aesthetically) doesn't make the wiki look amateurish at all, but that's a subjective viewpoint and I don't think I could change your mind on that.

I can't comment on the usage of it for the new Antagonists page. That wasn't my idea and I have no opinon on it. Also I don't believe there has to be any limitation on galleries only being used for "shared traits", but if there is a shared trait in this case it would be that the characters have been introduced in the same arc or cover story. I believe that to be useful information and it expands upon the existing arc pages in a meaningful way. It can be good to see the page for a cover story and see right away if any new characters debut in them for the series. I'll just lastly say that the wiki is a lot more visually interesting by displaying images instead of only text, and while a simple list may suffice for the bare minimum of information conveyed, there is no reason to limit it to that. Damage3245 (talk) 19:08, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

The one for the Wano Country Arc is a perfect illustration in how the gallery setup fails. There are so many background and side characters introduced that they clutter and obscure any meaningful information and utility. It also pushes the article over the template limit, causing other parts of the article to break. This latter issue was even brought up when the gallery idea was first suggested, and it should've been properly tested beforehand. Dragonus Nesha (talk) 20:48, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

The Wano Country Arc template hasn't been tested yet, but it also wasn't added to the page in the first place as it is still undergoing development. I think we can all agree though that the Wano Country Arc is an outlier in terms of length / complexity so this doesn't present an issue for most of the other arcs or cover stories. I do not think that the background or side characters add clutter; in fact the gallery helps keep track of them as I doubt everyone can just remember which characters appeared for the first time in a particular arc. I have a solution in mind for the Template Size issue which would only need to be applied to a couple of Story Arc pages such as Dressrosa or Wano Country. So that wouldn't be an obstacle. Damage3245 (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

So the galleries are for times when someone wants to look for information about a character but all they know about them is when they were introduced and their face? When does that happen?? Your reasoning make it even more unnecessary. Rhavkin (talk) 03:25, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I didn't say they exist for that specific reason, it's just an example. The Arc and Cover Story pages are summaries of the information about each arc, right? I think that a list of characters who have been introduced into the story in that arc is important information to have, and it helps keeping track of the characters. It can be interesting information to look through the Story Arc pages and see when a character made their first debut or who else debuted at the same time as them. The gallery format is just superior to a simple list because it displays additional information, has a picture of the character for easier identification and they're colored coded for each arc making them aesthetically unique to each page and making the page more visually interesting to the readers. I don't think arguments like "This is unnecessary" are particularly great because half of most wikis are frankly unnecessary, but sometimes things are included because they're fun or interesting. As long as when they're introduced they don't actually break the page, then they should be fine to add. Damage3245 (talk) 07:44, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

That isn't good enough. Why not have a bullet point at the start of the Story Impact section like we have in post timeskip re-introduction? Why is a gallery a necessary addition to the layout? Why do we need to keep track of when a character were introduced? Did you know you could sort the list of characters list to show their introduction in order? Isn't that what you are trying to achieve but on a smaller scale? You still haven't given any good reason for why is it necessary at all.

Also, we hardly ever use other wikis as reason for doing something. Each wiki has its own admins and rules and one wiki does not and should not affect another. Rhavkin (talk) 19:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

As I said, a bullet-point list is the bare minimum conveying of information. I'm not opposed to that if that was the only option, but it would be like listing the members of the Straw Hat crew just as a bullet-point on the crew page instead of the gallery format there. Why use a gallery at any time instead of a list? Because it's more interesting and it provides more information than just a name. If you start off with the mindset that something isn't "necessary" for the wiki, then there is nothing that could probably convince you. It's not like there is an objective list of necessary information that a wiki must adhere to. There is so much that the wiki is built on that is "not necessary" but we do it anyway. I simply consider a gallery to be more informative and more interesting than a simple list. Since it is a better system of conveying information to the user, I think it should be used. Also I don't think I ever said that one wiki should have to affect the other, but sometimes wikis can borrow inspiration from other wikis to improve themselves or learn from the mistakes of other wikis. Damage3245 (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Again, Galleries are used to identified individuals of a group with a shared trait like belonging to a group, being of the same race, or using the same abilities. Being introduced in the same arc is not a trait, its story based, like being an antagonist, while the usage of galleries have always been for in-universe shared trait as far as I recall. am not the one you need to convince, as I said before, talk to the admin who approved your idea to comment on this discussion. They are the ones I need to convince this is not the right way to present this information if any.

As for the other wikis argument, all I am saying is that it not convincing enough in this case. Saying we should do something because other wikis do it has never been a good reason to do something. Rhavkin (talk) 02:54, 21 June 2022 (UTC)