Category talk:Musical group navigational boxes

November 2006

Hi there, does anyone mind if I try to standardise the layout for these using the same header? I know it's a massive task ahead but I thought posting it on here could give me some help, it also adds a touch of professionalism onto each template I feel! I've been using this for example:

Evanescence

Does anyone have any objections or shall I carry on my merry way? (Stuey 182 13:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

That heading looks a bit tall; v•d•e could be moved to the left or right. Especially in the case of prolific bands with huge templates that take up more than half the screen, they can instead use any of the collapsible Template:Navigational templates with v•d•e built-in. The default colour for these templates is more of a purple than this blue, but it's rare for 2 band templates to appear in 1 article anyway. Pomte 06:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some standard for these templates? E.g. I see the use of different colours on, most seem to use blue(-ish) and some use black, like (Death (band) Spearhead 15:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most do use blue, #69c, in the same table format with Discography and Related articles as subheadings. User:MrDolomite has reworked some templates using collapsible tables/NavFrames, and their default colour is grey (see Template:The Pussycat Dolls). I have done the same thing myself, though I am contemplating changing them back to blue for consistency. If the band is notably associated with some color, then I guess that justifies the use of a special color in their template. –Pomte 17:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the recently created {{Navbox musical artist}}. –Pomte 01:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, like, I've seen in some templates the use of italic fonts, and some with quotation marks and others without. What should we use and why? Khullah (talk) 01:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization

Unless someone objects, I'm going to start categorizing these tonight. Very very overpopulated cat. I think the simplest way would be to use the existing cats we have like Category:Heavy metal musical groups. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 12:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But they will remain in subcategories of this category, right? –Unint 19:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they will. An example would be a category called Heavy metal band templates, which would be a subcat of both band templates and heavy metal musical groups. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 22:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I've created the first few. I just tacked "templates" onto the existing categories. Felt like that was the easiest way to go. I recategorized about 140 of the templates. Many more to go. I'd love love to see this cat get under 200. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 14:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very much appreciated. Everything to do with this category has become a monstrous task these days (and I'm willing to bet that since my last sweep another batch of new uncategorized templates have been created). This will help a lot. –Unint 17:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Well if you take a look at my userpage, I have links to several lists of uncategorized templates. "Astonishing" is a mild term for it. We literally have thousands and thousands of uncategorized templates. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 21:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woohoo!

We're down to 2 1/2 pages worth. Yeeha. :) --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Down to 1 page. :) My plan is to get this down as much as I can. And then I'll go into the subcats I created and see if further division is warranted. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 12:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All of this time later

We're up to 2 pages. Rats! :) We need to use subcats folks... --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 09:49, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And now we're basically back to where we started. Almost 3 pages...... --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 10:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]