Thread:Byfield/@comment-3361105-20140405174243/@comment-3361105-20140405193047

Yes. It is a byproduct of the way the template is designed, because the template is not designed for you to decide how it should be used on a whim, and then spread the effects of that whim all over the place without consulting anyone. That said, if ever your whims take you to a place where you are using a template in conflict with the way it was designed, you should not act on that whim without initiating a discussion as to whether your idea is amenable to everyone else.

I don't see how not having a category or a link is time ill-spent in comparison to the act of actually putting the field there in the first place. As far as I'm concerned, both are time ill-spent.

I appreciate that presentation of these things in a useful and accessible way is ideal. The Description field is essentially a caption. The subject field is a list, which appears in whatever order you fill it out. So, if you would like it to be filled out in the order that you think is the order characters appear in it - which is subjective - you can do that. My feeling is that it doesn't matter. The (Images) link next to each subject, or the subject's link itself will direct anybody to a place where they can identify characters by sight.

For that to be an option the Admin that maintains the locked templates would certainly have to go to the trouble of inserting a method for organizing the characters into the template, and yes, he would certainly place that at the bottom of his to-do list, given that it would add a further complication to an already very complicated template. I think your method of using editor comments to indicate where in the image the characters are is a fine way to do it without having to clutter the infobox with more code (and consequently go through all images on this website to re-configure their templates to accommodate the changes).

I believe these things trigger the Wrong Source category:
 * If it's textless, issue is filled out, and Source contains "Vol"
 * If it's textless, issue is not filled out, and Source is filled out with anything.
 * If it's a variant, source is filled out, and Issue is filled out.
 * If it's a variant, source is not filled out, but Issue is.
 * If it's a full cover, and Issue is filled out (whether Source is or not).
 * If it's Cover Art or a Variant and source is not filled out, but issue is. (Yes, there's a redundancy in there).

... I think that's it.

All this going through the image template is making me notice weird coding issues that need to be fixed.