Should we use Tabs, like the ones below, on this wiki? It would neaten pages, shorten extra long pages and make everything easily accessible.
You can write stuff in here and add in more tabs!
With stuff in it to show off my point.
- For the most part, I approve of this idea: it organises and neatens pages, shortens very long pages and makes information more easily accessible.
- On the other hand, however, they would disrupt the flow of articles on one page and would, if I recall correctly, render sub-headings and sub-sub-headings unusable, which might make each tab slightly lengthy or difficult to follow.
- Another thing would be that adding the "tabber" template/note/formula (whatever it is) on each and every page (unless there were a function to make it easier) would take quite some time and a small bit of effort.
- All in all, whilst tedious and holding minor disadvantages, I feel that if this project is approved by the rest of the community, it would be worth it in the long run. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 22:03, June 5, 2014 (UTC)
Aye, I thought it would make things easier. And, we do not have to do it all at once; Characters first, then places and locations and so on. Also, more than one person can use the tabbers as we go, so if you find a page that does not have them on, then you can add them in; it lightens the workload. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:05, June 5, 2014 (UTC)
- That's true that everyone can chip in: but 12,000 pages is no little load :) ! Nonetheless, it should be easy enough to put on, and will probably make things easier overall. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 22:28, June 5, 2014 (UTC)
Yep. As well as this, a page would be wide enough to fit first to seventh year all on one line. However, it MUST be below the infobox for years 1 - 7, otherwise is squishes them onto two awkward looking lines. And, once we've agreed on headings, we can just copy the headings across if they'd be the same for other people. Yes, I admit, 12,000 pages is a lot of pages, but there are lots of us on this wiki! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:36, June 5, 2014 (UTC)
- I think it's a lot of work for something that simply is not worth the trouble. As it was pointed out, converting all of our articles would be a tedious, seemingly never-ending endeavour to achieve practically nothing: all articles would contain exactly the same information they do now and, as far as organisation and ease to find information go, things would not change that much (articles with more than 3 (?) headings have a schematic and interactive table of contents anyways, which I think has proved to be efficient).
- In fact, I think there are considerable detractors we should bear in mind:
- The sheer ammount of work, for virtually no gain.
- It is incompatible with multiple sub-headings. Which we use, a lot. We can use tabs for only one level of headings and I actually think that would detract from the articles' organisation. The only way I can see this implemented is if we have tabs for only some of the headings, the same-level ones, and that, frankly, would look messy.
- What of "Table of contents"? Wouldn't tabs render the table of contents that follows the lead redundant? Doesn't the table of contents serve for exactly the same purpose as the suggested tabs, with the added bonus that Wiki creates and adds them automatically?
- I have concerns about number of tabs vs. article width. We have pages with tons of headings. Take Harry Potter, for instance. That page alone has 90 (!) headings at the moment. If the headings were to be converted into tabs, would they all fit in the articles' width? If they don't fit, the result would be, as HarryPotterRules1 described, squished awkward-looking lines — potentially confusing (defeating the purpose of neatness and organisation) and unaesthetic.
- They would be awkward-looking on articles with long infoboxes. See, for example, Phineas Nigellus Black. Most of the biography is not below the infobox (which means article width for tabs is reduced about one third), which creates the same concerns as above.
- That being said, I think the tabber function is not without its uses. I think we could use it more sparingly than HarryPotterRules1 suggest, while enjoying more of its functionality — it would be far more useful and neat to use it to organise picture galleries, media sections, and the like, in articles that feature them. -- 01:15, June 6, 2014 (UTC)
For Harry, we'd reduce the tabs. 1980 - 1981, Childhood, first year, second year, third year, fourth year, fifth year, sixth year, seventh year. For Phineas Nigellus Black, there are only 3 (or is It 4?) headings on the page... and that can fit within an infobox gap. On the other note, I can see where you are coming from.
Or, we could do it that we use the = = words = = as the headings and then the tabbers underneath for the people, Ron, Hermione, etc.