Template talk:Move infobox
Specific rules for link overlap between parameters[edit]
|
This talk page or section has a conflict or question that must be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment. |
The parameters before, after, variant_of, and variants have a tendency to want to include the same subject multiple times. For example, the Triple Jump is a variant of Double Jump (consecutive) that must be performed after Double Jump (consecutive). Actions that occur after Swimming are often kinds of swimming. (there's a few that aren't, but they don't have pages yet). Double kick grants a Long Jump the properties of the Spin, so its a variant of both. But the double kick is performed by Spinning then inputting a Long Jump, so Spin occurs before double kick. If the listed parameters have the same subject, and all of those mentions of the subject ae links, then we're putting the same links too close to each other. We should really have an hierarchy as to which of these parameters should have the link if the same subject appears in multiple parameters. I personally thing that variant_of and variants should have priority for having links above before and after, to keep the links in an infobox clustered closer together overall. (Variants tends to have more entires than before and after, by basis of being able to apply cross game rather than only to a single game.) Salmancer (talk) 04:52, October 23, 2026 (UTC)
[edit]
|
|
This talk page or section has a conflict or question that must be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment. |
When using the template, and thinking over it more, I encountered two unrelated problems.
Problem 1: how are entries supposed to be separated? I edited the articles broadly talking about the attack systems of the Mario & Luigi games, like Bros. Attack. For the variants/related/comparable sections, when multiple subjects are in one section, the intended way to list them seems to be using <br>. I used that same line break format for the "user" parameter, which seems to be incorrect? Mega Mario (which uses the form infobox to be clear) separates "applies to" members with commas, Wall Jump separates users with commas, but Fire Breath separates users with line breaks. It is unclear if it should be comma-separated or line-break-separated, and once it is decided the standard should be added to the template documentation. Me using line breaks likely incorrectly may have influenced others to incorrectly use line breaks instead of commas, and now there are two competing standards...
Problem 2: the "user" parameter being only for "Characters that have been able to use the move while under the player's control.". There are named moves used exclusively by NPCs, and there are even named moves in non-video-game media...where the concept of a "playable character" makes no sense. Wakebeam is a move used exclusively by an NPC in a video game, while Fireball Punch and Dynamic Punch are only used in non-game media. The current description for the user parameter effectively forbids using it at all for these edge-cases. While it makes sense to pull a Wikipedia ignore all rules for this, this should be resolved because this is a weird and funny problem.
On a related note to problem 2, I feel like there are edge-cases where listing NPC users of moves can make sense, like how some NPCs in the Mario & Luigi series use and teach moves, but the idea of it opening the floodgates for other stuff makes me appreciate the current line drawn of "only playable users of the move". --Spencer PK (talk) 08:54, October 23, 2026 (UTC)
