I think scroll boxes look ugly, and some time ago, I implemented a different way of dealing with long lists of appearances/sources; Revan is an example.
Should we replace scroll boxes with this system, or keep them? - Sikon 12:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I disagree about the scroll boxes being ugly. But I do like the method you used in Revan's article. However, I think it was unwarranted in that article. Scroll boxes are really only supposed to be used when there is a relatively long list of sources and/or appearances. When there are only a handful, like in the Revan article, sometimes that small amount of space can be utilized to fit a picture to the right of the list that otherwise wouldn't fit with your method. - JMAS 19:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I also disagree about the scroll boxes being ugly, and if someone wants to go through the sources/appearances, they have to make the article just as big as it would already be when using the collapsing box method. jSarek 00:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Per both above. It's nice to look at from a programming perspective, but functionally, the scroll boxes look better. In fact, not only do I disagree that they are ugly, I think they look quite nice. Wildyoda 20:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)