BattleMaster Wiki talk:Article example

Table of Contents everywhere?

I'm not extatic about the idea of having a table of contents on every page. Some pages are just going to be too small or focused on one topic not to need so many headers as to merit a ToC (afaik, four). Also, what's the point when something gets long enough to merit its own page? I had a bit of a struggle over this when I typed up the basic Unit page, wondering whether I should describe morale as much as needed, or whether to give an overview then link to the main page. I know morale effects regions as well as units, but ignoring the region morale it gives you an idea of the problem. DorianGray 20 July 2005 11:45 (CEST)

Any longer article should have a TOC. If your article is very short, you should check if it really justifies being it's own article. --Tom 20 July 2005 15:48 (CEST)

Also, to solve your particular problem - work with templates. Here's how it could work:

• Write Template:Troops morale and Template:Region morale
• On the Troops page include the troops morale template
• On the Regions morale page include... you guessed it
• On the generic Morale page, include both...

Mind you, this is probably not the nobel-prize winning idea, but maybe a good start. --Tom 20 July 2005 15:48 (CEST)

My big problem with the use of Templates like that is that there doesn't seem to be a master list of them anywhere, and I'm afraid that we'll wind up with a whole lot of Templates that are just used once. -- Dolohov 20 July 2005 19:09 (CEST)

I think it would be a much better idea to have two pages: Morale (troop) and Morale (region). That way, the Region, Judge and Civil Work pages could all link to Morale (region). Maybe have a short overview of region morale on the region page with a link to the longer explaination. -- Nicholas July 20, 2005 22:11 (CEST)

Right, there's no master list. That's why I urge everyone to only use templates if you already know that you'll be using the content at least twice. Don't do it just because you think it might get used again. --Tom 20 July 2005 22:21 (CEST)

Actually, there is a master list. Go to Special:Allpages and select "Template" from the dropdown box. -- Nicholas July 20, 2005 22:27 (CEST)

I was thinking whether to make Morale a large page with two sections or make it a disambiguation page linking to something like Morale (troops) and Morale (region), actually. And I don't like the idea of having a lot of pages built up using almost nothing but templates. DorianGray 20 July 2005 23:40 (CEST)

Good point. Yes, sometimes disambiguation pages are good to have. Then again, if the two things are closely related, and troop/region morale are, why not put them on one page? I agree that pages should not be mostly template content, but for some pages that really is the best way to build them - see the Main Page. --Tom 21 July 2005 13:16 (CEST)

There's nothing wrong with a combination of the two ideas: Make the disambiguation page so that it contains useful (but basic) information. (Templates, perhaps?) The actual articles could then contain lengthy discussions on the subject. In this case, the disambiguation page would give a paragraph each on morale in regions and morale of troops, what they are and why they're important (and especially how they interact!). Then the individual articles would discuss how to raise morale, and the effects morale can have. I'll try to put something together to illustrate this. --Dolohov 21 July 2005 21:27 (CEST)

The TOC looks much better on the right, I think. --Dolohov 26 July 2005 02:38 (CEST)

I'm not so sure, I agree with the idea, but long tables of contents are messing up the formatting of some of the pages. e.g. Talk:Meta:General_Talk -- Nicholas July 27, 2005 19:25 (CEST)