Forum:NPC tags

Hello everyone, just opening this topic to launch a discussion about the usage of NPC tags inside pages.
 * <-- This is a NPC tag
 * Jarod Shadowsong <-- This is a normal link

I don't really like NPC tags but I don't really care enough to remove them I see them either. But, other users are more passionate about the things, and I often see big back-and-forth edits with almost all links in a page being switched to NPC tags (sometimes erroneously... no, Goldshire is definitively NOT an NPC), and another day all the NPC tags being removed and switched back to links, but with sometimes important text accidentally being removed as well.

So the way I see it, these back-and-forth edits are dangerous. In the rush to either tag or untag everything, good text is sometimes lost. So I think we should discuss to try to end this situation.

What do you guys think?

--Xporc (talk) 07:42, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


 * It might be a good idea to try and reach some consensus on this yeah. I don't really like the NPC-tag links myself, but I don't feel too strongly against them either. Not enough to search for them or change them when I find them, as it is. PeterWind (talk) 15:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I was going to say that they seem useful in certain contexts, like talking about an NPC specifically rather than a major lore character, but as I really thought about WHY that would be, I realized that I can't actually think of any reason why such a tag would ever be useful. The pop-up doesn't really display any important information about that NPC, which would require someone to click through the link anyway--making it more of an annoyance than a useful feature. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:49, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * You will only find one (maybe two) users advocate for them. Remove them if you can.-- 20:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Since it's relevant, I'll also note that the template itself says that, as per WP:MOS, it should only be used when referencing NPCs as pertaining to game mechanics. So most of what the few people who use them, use them for (i.e. loading a character's Relatives section with the NPC template), isn't how they should be used. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * This topic is so deja vu... 21:10, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have finally exposed my ideas. 15:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
 * And I have given another idea here. I have seen no response, until now, on any of my comments. 19:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
 * There are many articles in this wiki (specially about wars) that are NPC-tagged pattern articles and I believe they should stay on this way, until a clear policy is made. I hope these tags be allowed in some occasions, that I have already exposed on this site (specially in infoboxes) and, if it is possible, as a pattern. 20:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I dislike popups, especially considering some of these "NPCs" don't have pictures at all. I don't have much more to add on the topic. Xporc (talk) 22:56, 24 December 2016 (UTC)


 * My 2c on Template:NPC usage at the moment:


 * 1.) Useful
 * Infobox for Factions / Wars -- Looks and feels more edit-friendly.


 * 2.) Debatable
 * Item source -- Maybe all you need is to see NPC's image for reference, but most likely you'll click the link anyway though.


 * 3.) Not useful
 * Discussion in the context of lore -- This goes to style.


 * Beyond that... /shrug. Myself personally, I try to use it sparingly. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 00:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I want to reiterate my opinions: Just because the name of the template is "NPC" it should not be interpreted to the letter; it would be redundant create another template to the same functionality. The usefulness of this template is basically see the character in question and some other data (specially the image; which serves to recognize the character) without having to open the link and await to load the whole page. This template can be useful on characters out of the game as well because it can illustrates characters when you are reading about lore, for the example. I'm wanting here a consensus to use the template as pattern in:

PLAN A: Every character link anywhere. PLAN B: At least in lists and infoboxes (including warboxes). And I ask here for a small consensus the using it on lists and infoboxes from now to onward until we achieve a greater conclusion/consensus about it. Can I start using this way? My usage of this template saves me time, so I was wonder why some people think the usage of this template is annoying. This template is really useful to me. 17:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The "Every character link anywhere" option is completely out of question. I am ready to tolerate their usage in infoboxes and warboxes if a compromise can be reached that way. I'd also rather not see them used in lists but that's my personal opinion. Xporc (talk) 18:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm going to copy what I said at Template talk:NPC: I personally mainly use the template in lists and infoboxes because I find that it's quicker/more convenient to type and because it takes up slightly less space in the wikitext than the usual RaceIcon + plain link. I do agree with not using NPC in NPCboxes and the actual text and wouldn't mind if the pop-up function was removed, but I'd rather not see usage of the template banned completely since, the way I use it, it can simply provide a more concise and clean-looking way to link to character pages. -- 07:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I have a little new idea about the use of the template: Use to see out the person behind citations like what I have tried to do here, tagging the name . In this case it's a way to identify who is behind the citation. It's ok using it this way? 00:57, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * No. The deal was that I'd tolerate NPC tags only in lists and infoboxes while you keep them out of everywhere. Don't try to push it any further. Xporc (talk) 08:29, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * And for god's sake, I've just been catching you trying to add NPC tags to the main bodies of other articles. Don't start this shit again I swear. Xporc (talk) 08:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

We could probably make displaying NPC tooltips a user preference. Any thoughts on whether this is worthwhile, and, if so, whether they should be enabled or disabled by default? — foxlit (talk) 12:09, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm kinda unwilling to add preference settings to the whole wiki because of a single user, to be honest. Xporc (talk) 12:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure we have preference settings that are used by exactly zero users, so that's not really a concern: it's not like the wiki software particularly cares if there is one more user preference or not. More importantly, it seems like this could make exactly the same wikitext satisfy both of you, which should hopefully cut down on the amount of conflicts around minor formatting issues. — foxlit (talk) 23:21, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well that's a potential solution, then. Just because I don't like some formatting, I shouldn't force everyone else to follow my taste. Could anyone else comment? Xporc (talk) 07:29, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * As I posted above, I don't particularly care one way or the other, but if making it a user preference setting cuts down on the risk of potential edit wars, I'd say go for it. -- 09:55, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * If that's a thing that can be done, then I say do it. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 09:57, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well if it's not too much work, yeah... So, what would the default setting be? I don't particularly care about it, honestly. Xporc (talk) 10:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Disabled by default, for sure. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 10:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well if it can solve the issue for involved parties without breaking formatting for those uninvolved, that sounds good to me! PeterWind (talk) 13:20, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It's nice, specially if can I resume my 'PLAN A'-style to put the Template:NPC everywhere. To include, I had a PLAN A2 (Use on every character link anywhere except in current text) and a PLAN A3 (Use at least in citations; as exposed before). I had this user-personalization idea in my mind in the past, but I ended never exposing it or checking if it was possible. Also, I want to reaffirm my opinion: Just because the template is named "NPC" it doesn't mean that should be used only on NPCs, just because name. Its useful functionality of exposing data without having to open the article fits well on all characters infoboxes. Not using it just because it originally designed to NPC is an waste; create a redundant Template:Character_Identifier is unnecessary. So, as my belief was the template should be used everywhere I believed that I was just using it's potential, not abusing of it. If the personalization is going to be applied, I would like someone tell me how it would work. I am also proposing to create a similar template to factions, showing the main image of the faction's infobox and some useful data. 16:47, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This solution is absolutely not, in any way shape or form, giving carte blanche for you or anyone else to use Template:NPC everywhere. I cannot stress this enough. Most links do not need to be templated. As for "just because the template is named NPC doesn't mean that should be used only on NPCs," I want to point out that the documentation on the template itself explicitly says otherwise. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * What DarkTZeratul said + absolutely out of question to open a similar can of worm with the factions. Xporc (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, don't do that. It's a pain to edit from the live editor. Not in the body of the pages. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 14:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * This is now live. If you do wish to see those tooltips, you should go to Preferences > Gadgets and check "Show NPC tooltips".
 * It is worth noting that  and   now produce functionally identical output, so please just use plain links unless the rest of npc's formatting (inline level, title, icons, etc) is desired. — foxlit (talk) 01:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Dandy! PeterWind (talk) 01:33, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ...Wow. Gabrirt won that one.-- 01:48, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * There is still a problem. If the the link goes to a redirect or is a pipped link, it do not turns on to an NPC tagg. "Maiev Shadowsong" produces an NPC display while "Maiev" no.  (Arcanist Doan) goes to show as a NPC display while " " (Arcanist Doan/Doan) not. Can someone fix it?  14:51, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

This seems to be creating some issues with pages where the name displayed by the NPCbox is different from the page name. For example,  now automatically produces Deathwing, while   produces Anduin Wrynn. Is there any way to prevent this from happening without changing the NPCboxes? -- 07:42, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Ayup, I can confirm. Now everytime you write  it shows up as "Thrall / Go'el" Xporc (talk) 11:16, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Your fix seems to work, Foxlit! Thanks. Xporc (talk) 12:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Light bless Foxlit for the bot. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)