Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Favor"
From Project: Gorgon Wiki
m |
m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT) | :If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? [[User:Arindor|Arindor]] ([[User talk:Arindor|talk]]) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT) | ||
| − | ::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll | + | ::I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll leave it as is if no one else finds it off-putting. [[User:Alleryn|Alleryn]] ([[User talk:Alleryn|talk]]) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT) |
Revision as of 14:18, 17 March 2017
Link to Favor page
I don't like this latest change. Now many NPC pages have dozens of links to the same page (/Favor). Most people reading will already be familiar with the basic concepts of the game (there's a link to Favor in the Basics section on the main page), i don't think there needs to be a link directing them every time they see a favor requirement. I suggest this be reverted. Alleryn (talk) 04:04, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
- If you don't like it, feel free to revert it. The change does nothing except make the link available. It causes no change to the appearance of the Favor display, yet adds the convenience of an easily usable link any time favor is shown. When I was learning this game, I found myself frequently wondering what the favor levels are between where I am at and where I need to be, and also how many favor points are required to get there. I didn't even know the Favor page existed, and just muddled through until I stumbled upon it one day. But even since, each time I've had a question, I've had to search for it. I felt the link to be a convenience to players who have not memorized favor levels (and points between them) yet. I am not sure what the objection is, other than knowing that many links could exist on the page? Is this a performance concern? Arindor (talk) 08:31, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
- I can't speak to performance concerns. I expect that transclusion always creates a hit; I don't think making a link would be expensive. But that's only my intuition. I just find it clutters the page and looks bad with that many links to one spot. For me, it's a style concern. I'll leave it as is if no one else finds it off-putting. Alleryn (talk) 14:16, 17 March 2017 (CDT)
