Template talk:Storylink

Oh... wait a second, now that I made a change I finally realized why it was written the way it was in the first place. I didn't understand that "result in a simple tab" thing. I guess... I can sort of see that point of that. If somebody doesn't want any text to appear, but just have a little marker off to the side.

My preference would be for it to defailt to the name of the article being referenced, which is how I just set it up. I can see the potential appeal of a textless link (to some people, at least, just not to me) though. I think the mess of characters that was there, though, wasn't good. I mean... it was this, right? "([|" Plus those things appeared around the text if you did choose to include link text. If we're going to do it textless, I think a simple asterisk would be fine.

I'm also inclined to say that giving the template a background color might help to make it obvious that it's something of interest and not just random floating text.

(My *most* preferred preference, of course, is to explicitly cite sources within the text of the article, but I feel like that is never going to become the majority opinion.)

Anybody else have any opinions?

--Steve-o 22:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

On reflection, I like making the article title the default. You can get a 'blank' tag with an extra pipe if you want.

However- I think changing the right-bracket to a right-parentheses makes the underlining look dorky. (Or at least dorkier.) The purpose behind the underlining was to make the link appear more structural, less text-y, so the eye could skip over it if it wasn't interested in the margin-notes-- basicly tryign to overcome the natural human inclination to cet caught on readable text.

What do you think of the 'attached to the right side' version on the wipe-out talk page? (the one with the outline/background) -Derik 22:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The one that just looks like a little doohickey in a grey box? It's unobtrusive and small, which is good, but it's also totally obtuse: seeing that, I would have no idea what it was. I could hover over it and see that it's a link to another article, but even then, I'm not going to be sure why it's there. Something that is more clearly a reference link would be more to my liking. --Steve-o 23:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

([ MF ep 6 ] Like adding a note in it? The one problem with a note like this? It doesn't 'stack' well. (more than 1 note per line) I guess my question is- how much of a problem is that? Do we really expect story-refs to be so dense that they're stacking? ([ WotD ] ([ MtMtE ] I always assumed they'd be used less like, well, Ratchet's, which has a story ref to every damn story he's in, and more like 'here's a semi-lengthy chunk, like a paragraph + that's all lifted from one source, this is the provenance of that source.'

(and here's an example of them stacking impolitely.) -Derik 00:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

From Teletraan I: The Transformers Wiki, a Wikia wiki.