This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. The result of the debate was use scroll boxes for long appearance lists rather than separate pages—Green Tentacle(Talk) 13:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Now that we've implemented scrollboxes, I would think that we'd want to use them to eliminate one of the most annoying features of appearances -- the separate pages of appearances used for main characters. It's simply silly to split that information off into a separate article. Even worse, some of those lists are split up by media type, rendering them non-chronological, as they should be. There are only ten articles using them, and it's really annoying to have that information removed from the article when there's a nice little scrollbox template waiting to let us fit it in neatly. Why not integrate and use the scrollboxes for what they were designed to do?
Keep in mind this has already been decided, so I guess we'll need some kind of supermajority to override the old consensus. My question from the previous thread remains. —Xwing328(Talk) 01:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't know about "decided". We've already had as many votes in one day as that thread got in two months. It was brought up, largely ignored, and closed after almost seven weeks of neglect. And as for length, these articles are long enough anyway that anyone on dialup is screwed. The lists aren't saving them that much. I'm also wary of pandering to the lowest possible technological denominator. We should certainly strive to accommodate users who aren't on the cutting edge, but there comes a point where we're sabotaging our effectiveness as an encyclopedia with the 90% of people who don't have dialup. Frankly, if you've got dialup, you've got to accept that things are going to go slow. Havac 02:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)