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. -- 12:36, April 9, 2021 (EDT)
 * If it's not being used anywhere, why keep it? 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) -- 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. -- 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. 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. -- 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)