Forum:Infobox Aura revisited

Forums: Yew Grove > Infobox Aura revisited

More than two years ago we passed a thread mandating that auras of different tiers be merged into a single page. Two years later, that still hasn't happened -- of the 62 auras in Category:Auras, 19 of them use the new template.

I am proposing that we reverse the decision from that thread, and re-split the auras. Back then it seemed like a knee-jerk reaction to having new recent auras, and it still does now. If you look at one of the pages (say, Tracker) that uses the infobox, you notice a few problems immediately -- the release date is static and only shows one date for four different items, the infobox does not make it clear what the names of the items are, the way the cooldown/recharge/examines are handled are clunky, and it lacks many of the necessary things that come with other items' infoboxes.

In a way, there are two separate issues: one is the merging of 4-5 distinct objects into a single page, and the other is the way we've stopped treating them like items. Just look at an item page, and see all the parameters that are listed there that aren't on the aura page. By having a separate infobox for auras, we confuse people, and we assume that they know more about them as items than they do. It's reductive. It also makes it significantly more complicated when new auras are released (like today, when there was confusion over the status of Legendary Greenfingers).

Overall, the aura infobox was an unnecessary overextension of RS:G which never made sense in the first place and was never implemented by anyone. It would frankly be much easier to move them back to them item-state than it would be to finish the merge. And I think that would be the right decision even if they were already merged. ʞooɔ 19:04, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Support split - ʞooɔ 19:04, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Support - I strongly dislike when we feel the need to mush all the information into a single page just because they're related. These are all unique items from one another; it doesn't make much sense to force all this information into the same space. MolMan 19:14, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Suggestion/Split split- I support the idea of making a separate item class for auras such as how there is one for weapons and making a disambiguation page for them,then post them as if they're items in that class,but for now the split seems the best idea for sake of getting it done. Shredern (talk) 19:27, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Support split, keep infobox I think the infobox for the auras is a good idea and if the different tiers for the auras are on separate pages, then surely the clunkiness issue would no longer be one? AnselaJonla 19:38, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

The infobox aura lacks much of the information associated with item pages -- what's wrong with having the cooldown and cost in the text, rather than a separate infobox? Even if it's important to have those things put in semantically rather than just with words, why does that necessitate replacing the entire infobox? Not to mention that since we had that thread, there have been auras that don't fit the scheme we have set up for the aura infobox. ʞooɔ 23:07, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose split, change infobox instead - If I want information on a fishing aura, I'll go to Call of the Sea, and I find it much more convenient to have all the information about the different tiers of the aura (which is basically the same item with slightly different details) on the same page. I'd rather see the infobox changed to prevent the current clunkiness. Oil4 ^Talk 20:30, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

We can still have some of that information there (in fact, we already did before some of them were half-merged). But there's nothing we can do about changing a single instance of the infobox that will fix all the problems that the merge has caused. Release dates, examines, just basic item characteristics...it's not like we can fit five of those in a single infobox unless we use the switch infobox, which would be totally pointless and wouldn't solve the original confusion that we saw today. ʞooɔ 23:02, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral - The original thread's closing statement says that auras may be merged into a single article. It didn't mandate it, which is at least partially the reason why it hasn't been done yet (I hope). Anyway, as to whether or not it's a good idea, there are definitely great reasons to split them, but at the same time there are great reasons to merge them. I'll stay neutral on this one. --Liquid^Talk 23:10, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral/weak oppose - Per oli. Modify the aura infobox to resemble the item infobox, and add additional info for the auras like lasting/cooldown time/price (something like Template:Infobox Seed). Then use switch infobox for diff tiers. User:Azliq7 01:08, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

What's the point of using the switch infobox when they're different items? So far as RS:G goes, they should be split. There doesn't seem to be real benefit to a merge beyond displaying some information (cooldowns/effects for all tiers) all together, which we already had before the merge. ʞooɔ 02:39, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

Change infobox instead - Per Oli. Temujin 01:12, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

Change it how? Nobody's outlined what would actually be needed to keep it merged without using switch infoboxes, which as far as I'm concerned are not an option considering how bad/unreliable they are. ʞooɔ 02:39, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

Strong Support - I mean, they're different items and have different release dates and stuff. Sesna2 (talk) 06:16, January 28, 2014 (UTC)