General Discussion

The guide does list a couple .5 examples, but they're few and far between. The guide lists Wildlife as having a speed of 8.5, like the article, but also a weight of 6 and a handling of 3, unlike the article which goes to .5. These stats were added by Mariomario64, who stopped editing in 2014 and also seems to have added the stats for most of the karts. The example you used, Banisher, doesn't match up either. To compare the article and the guide, the article lists that it has a speed of 2.5 while the guide says it has a speed of 2, the article has an acceleration of 9.5 while the guide has 10, the article has a drift of 4 while the guide has 5, and the remaining stats are the same. I could chalk up the speed and acceleration differences to rounding, but the drift's off by a unit. Those stats were added by LaLaLand123, who also stopped editing in 2011. What bugs me the most is that, besides LaLa's addition and the .5 numbers (other example (ROB-BLS)), Mariomario's stats are consistent with the guide. It makes sense, as the guide was released in 2010 and Mariomario made their edits in 2011, but the .5 has to have come from somewhere that I'm just not seeing. Maybe it really is just as simple as "they did it by eye".
 
Walkazo said:
Three pages isn't enough cause for resorting to css outsourcing, but I agree that just having the {{color-link}}s is the simplest solution.

You already have the hover text copied from my template for everything but the basically-self-explanatory HP, Level, Attack, Defence, Moves, Location(s) and Tattle inputs. You can also get the legend and explanation stuff straight from my draft too (consistency is a good thing for inputs, tooltips and instructions) - really, all you'd need to add is that the names need to be colour-linked, and remove the direction and alignment stuff.

I'm not a fan of the bold/italic legend in the first place: bold's hard to see for anything but black font, with the increased size of the names here further obscuring it, and the italics seem out of place. I find colour-coding is much better, so perhaps, since we're manually color-linking everything anyway, we could just give bosses yellow links and helpers lime (then used piped color-link for the numbers, "(Lee)"s, and whatnot; agreed that the refs should just be removed and dealt with outside the chart). I checked, and both colours look fine against the dark blue, contrast with each other well, but don't clash badly or look garish. I'd also say just make all the names bold by default (i.e. built into the template): it looks better than the larger font being all spindly.
Click to expand...
I did a few bits here and there and finished the coloring codes. You can do final touches and then it could be implemented. I wonder if a proposal is necessary?
 
Shaggy said:
I did a few bits here and there and finished the coloring codes. You can do final touches and then it could be implemented. I wonder if a proposal is necessary?
Click to expand...
I've been working on making horizontal versions of all the RPG templates and was planning on making a proposal to get all the redesigns cleared at the same time. This could be part of the same proposal, seeing as it dovetails perfectly with needing to update and expand the content of many of the infoboxes: all that really will need to be done going from the bestiary(/bestiaries) to the enemy pages is changing the template title, removing/changing the name input, and adding alignment and direction - the rest is copypasta.

Most of the templates are done:

User:Walkazo/Test - pmenemybox - PM
User:Walkazo/Test2 - MLinfobox - M&L:SS
User:Walkazo/Test3 - pm2enemybox - PM:TTYD
User:Walkazo/Test4 - spmenemybox - SPM
User:Walkazo/Test5 - pitenemy - M&L:PiT
User:Walkazo/Test6 - pmssenemy - PM:SS

I'm in the middle of the M&L:BIS one (bisenemy), and after that it's just M&L:DT (dtenemy) and SMRPG (smrpgenemy), since M&L:PJ doesn't have an infobox or bestiary yet. I started the project months ago but got stalled by RL work and then translation and other misc stuff around here, but I figure taking a break from the endless name translation proofreading to just get these redesigns done is a better management of my time. I'm hoping to have everything done this week.
 
Sorry for not being here, I was sooooooo busy during Christmas, spending hours on creating high-quality mods for Garry's Mod (it paid off, too), I haven't had the time to check the wiki. Oh, I remember the bestiary, I brought up my issues with it, especially how it negatively impacts resolution. Hmm, I think the background color under tattle can be slightly lighter for the sake of better contrast (also, tattle text can be lengthy, more the reason to make it readable). As for color coding, you should also color match in the Legend as well but make sure the text has a blue background that matches in the infobox, so it looks highlighted. That way, people can see the text.

Anyway, take your time. I'm not trying to instill pressure on you if that's you how perceive it. I'm looking forward to replacing those crappily-placed infoboxes though since they're bugging me like a never-ending itch.
 
As someone who hasn't played Mario Kart DS, is there any reason the Standard Karts don't have articles? They all seem to have unique appearances with unique stats.
 
Time Turner said:
As someone who hasn't played Mario Kart DS, is there any reason the Standard Karts don't have articles? They all seem to have unique appearances with unique stats.
Click to expand...

They also have unique names, unlike the other standard karts where they were just called "Standard Kart S" or whatever, but if we were to split those, we also have to split Standard Kart S, M, and L. I think it's feasible to create separate articles for them

Though the idiots at the Model's Resource didn't bother ripping the goddang textures for the rest of the Mario Kart DS standard karts aside from Mario's. screw them
 
Time Turner said:
As someone who hasn't played Mario Kart DS, is there any reason the Standard Karts don't have articles? They all seem to have unique appearances with unique stats.
Click to expand...

The unique stats and appearances match with the player.

also the names are like "Standard MR" for Mario.
 
I think it'd be worth having pages. We have articles for far more minor, data-scarce things that people are less likely to want to read about. Completeness and consistency are good.
 
The Category "Articles with titles from other languages" includes many English-titled articles. I know it's policy to use English nouns when the Japanese name used an English loanword (instead of a romanization), but I suspect that some names are simply English translations of the official Japanese name. Examples include Armored Stinger, Bomb Bomb, Chicken Duck, Dance Spider, Timer Block, and Skeleton Bird. However, since I don't speak Japanese, I can't tell the difference between translations and English-words-which-were-used-in-the-Japanese-name-waddayacallits.

Could somebody who speak Japanese browse through the category in order to spot potentially policy-breaking titles? Thanks :)

---

I was halfway through moving the reference tags from the "Names in other languages" to the introduction when I noticed other inconsistencies. In my opinion, every article should stick to the following format:

[Romanized name] ([Kanji name][1]) is blah blah blah...

(...)

Names in other languages

[table containing Romanized name, Kanji name, and English translation]

For a more visual example, see Black Butapokkī which already includes all of these elements. Most of the other articles lack one or several elements. For instance, Aqua Kuribō lacks a "Names in other languages" section, Aqua Man lacks the Kanji in the introduction, etc. Additionally, Bow Balloon's introduction includes both the English name, the original Kanji, and the romanized Kanji. How do you guys feel about having all of this information here?

Of course, we'd have to adapt this format for German/French/any non-Japanese article, as well as for articles which don't need references. Feel free to ask me for any clarification.