Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Doom items"
From DoomWiki.org
m (Feel opposite.) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
: I disagree. If anything, I feel this template is a bloated monstrosity. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 21:49, 9 February 2016 (CST) | : I disagree. If anything, I feel this template is a bloated monstrosity. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 21:49, 9 February 2016 (CST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : I kinda agree that it isn't the best template too. It could use a facelift, maybe something akin to this? http://info.sonicretro.org/Template:S2MDOmni [[User:Death Egg|Death Egg]] ([[User talk:Death Egg|talk]]) 18:34, 10 February 2016 (CST) | ||
Revision as of 19:34, 10 February 2016
With the existence of this template, what's the point of having the smaller templates like this one? http://doomwiki.org/wiki/Template:Doom_weapons Couldn't they all just be replaced with this template? Death Egg (talk) 18:55, 4 February 2016 (CST)
- Gosh, do you suppose the wiki could handle that much efficiency? :> Myself I've always thought bigger templates looked bloated hanging off the bottom of the article, but in terms of navigation I can see advantages (e.g. someone's just clicking around looking for topical tips as they play, and doesn't want to backtrack four steps to move from chaingun to megasphere). In any case you're probably the first to bring up the question since 2008, so we'll see what people say. Ryan W (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2016 (CST)
- I disagree. If anything, I feel this template is a bloated monstrosity. --Quasar (talk) 21:49, 9 February 2016 (CST)
- I kinda agree that it isn't the best template too. It could use a facelift, maybe something akin to this? http://info.sonicretro.org/Template:S2MDOmni Death Egg (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2016 (CST)
