Template talk:Navbox Pet Commands

To detail or not to detail

I personally like having the slash command parameters in the Navbox so that I can see them at a glance. But the parameters add noise that gets distracting and is hard to find a command at a glance. Which format should we use for the slash command navbox templates? --Konoko 23:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd have to say I like the more detailed one, myself. The links make it relatively easy to pick out each command. Just my two cents. --Eabrace 00:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Detailed +1 -- Agge (talk) 04:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd vote against the detailed version. Navboxes are supposed to be for navigation, not information. The more information that you put in, the less easy it is to use for navigation due to increased clutter. Also, the more bloat it puts on the page. With the parameters, it becomes a mini-reference instead of navigation. -- Sekoia 06:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

2 for, 1 against. I'm still on the fence. I like mini-references where ever I can put them. But I also like clean looks. Each Slash Command navbox's title should point to a page with the commands in detail anyways. Like Pet Commands does now (need to add a few, actually).

I also added a no detail, no slash example. --Konoko 16:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, User talk:Konoko/Slash Command NavBoxes, 3 alternatives for current NavBoxes. Without the prefixes, neither plus "+" nor slash "/", the navbox looks clean on Firefox 3 Windows XP. I'm curious what it looks like in other browers. BRB, going to narnia. --Konoko 17:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Back from narnia, rendering looked ok on all browers. Which means that it looks just as cluttered or uncluttered -Konoko

Shades29A suggested having one detailed, one not. Added second article {{Pet Commands Reference}}. --Konoko 21:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)