Template talk:Character/Species-infobox

Do we really need this?

I really don't see the point in using this infobox. In its current state, it's the species infobox with a different color, portrayal perimeters, and full name and species perimeters (which are useless since it's specifically intended for characters not distinguished from their main species). Apparently no one else knows how this should be used since it's been sitting here for over half a year and hasn't been used on any articles. I think we're better off scrapping this template, using the species infobox when applicable, and also adding portrayals sections to the main species infobox. If there's no opposition, I'll probably start a TPP to delete this soon. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 12:36, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

If it's not being used anywhere, why keep it? Nightwicked Bowser 13:15, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

For what it's worth, here's the original proposal that led to its creation. Can't say I agree with it though, the character infobox doesn't really have much that the species infobox doesn't, portrayal is the only one that would be relevant, which really should be added to the species infobox regardless of whether or not anything happens with this. (Yes I'm aware I originally voted for this) -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 14:37, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

It's primarily because in some instances they are treated as actual characters so using species alone would look odd. I haven't really gotten around to implementing it because I've been busy with school and building up the Triforce Wiki. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:04, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

Pretty much the only difference would be the color of the infobox though, isn't it? I feel like it would make more sense to just use the species infobox and mention individual characters in the article when appropriate than to have a third infobox that isn't really different functionally. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 15:22, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

Not sure if it's entirely relevant to this discussion, but I felt it was worth mentioning that I have incorporated this template on the Draggadon, Koopa Kid and Dorrie articles, so it is no longer unused. In Draggadon's case I feel it makes the page look more neat since it previously had two infoboxes in different sections and the species one had the character with which it shares an article in the 'notable members' section, but for the other two it does seem to be essentially the same besides different colour. I do think this is a useful template overall. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:56, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

I don't know if it's intentional or not but the color clash on the template makes it look very... Not good. The only one that benefits from it is Draggadon since now it has a portrayal in the infobox, but that really should be on the standard species infobox already. I still don't see how this is preferable over adding portrayal to the species infobox, using that, and calling it a day. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 16:06, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

Note that I didn't actually make this, I had it on the backburner and someone else did. (As a side note, one could make an argument for retiring all of the more specific character/species/item infoboxes in lieu of an "entity infobox" due to the many borderline cases.) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:29, April 9, 2021 (EDT)

Delete this template

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

passed 4-0
Per the discussion above, I feel that the creation of this template was misguided and it does not provide anything of value that isn't or can't be handled by our already existing infoboxes. This infobox is only used on a handful of pages, so I figured I would list them here and go over how it's applied:

• Charizard, Greninja, Incineroar, Ivysaur, Jigglypuff, Lucario, Mewtwo, Pichu, Pikachu, Squirtle - Only parameters already present on Template:Character infobox are used. Due to identical coloration, the only way to know a different template is in use is to look at the actual wikicode.
• Dino Piranha, Koopa Kid, Naval Piranha - Only parameters already present on Template:Species infobox are used. The only indication that this is a separate template is that it uses different coloration.
• Dorrie - Does not use any parameters unique to either template, but appears visually identical to Template:Character infobox.
• Draggadon, Inkling - The only cases of this template having any unique application. Unique parameters from Species-infobox are used alongside portrayal information currently available only on Character infobox.

So this is barely used on any pages as is, and only two of them actually make use of it. This template can be rendered completely obsolete simply by adding Character infobox's two portrayal fields to Species-infobox, and frankly, this should've been done a long time ago anyway since several species have had documented, consistent voice actors for years (Wiggler and Shy Guy come to mind). Regardless of the outcome of this proposal I think that should be done, but obviously if this passes I'll see to it that it happens sooner rather than later.

Proposer: Waluigi Time (talk)
Deadline: January 12, 2022, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Waluigi Time (talk) Per it's-a me.
2. Somethingone (talk) Per Proposal, it is kinda unnecessary if only 2 articles actually use it right.
3. WildWario (talk) Per proposal.
4. OhoJeeOnFire (talk) It’s like you are using a duplicate template that is only used twice!

Post Proposal

So, I was unaware of this due to all my days off for the past month being forced to be spent working on my car. Anyways, I want to say that the point of the template was not something as trivial as a VA parameter, but simply to acknowledge that some entities can be variably depicted as either a singular character or a species, since Nintendo often does not care to distinguish and some readers have difficulty coming to that realization without it being openly stated. Anyways, probably the better solution in light of that would have been instead to have deleted the separate character and species infoboxes and fully implement this, because let's face it, the subjects aren't getting any more distinct in that regard. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:20, January 13, 2022 (EST)