>>...the chronological listing overrides some other features we have...

Ohh, didn't expect that at all, damn. Okay, I hear ya. It's still too bad, as the feature really IS super-useful & super-convenient, especially when compared with the default listings. But I understand (maybe I just got spoiled-rotten,lol). I guess I'm just gonna have to suck it up, just to complete my Harleen Quinzel binge-reading on Comixology, heh.

We've discussed this here over a year ago for sure. It would not be technically that hard--if nothing else, we could just copy the template from there. The only question is if we find that desirable. Another option is to have a bot that creates lists for character appearances.

Yeah, couldn't find that discussion.

That second option sounds considerably more work.

Or, we could have the categories sorted chronologically and a bot sort alphabetically, which is much more trivial.

Thanks for the additional heads-up, friend.

>>...only question is if we find that desirable...

I presume you meant the template/code copying part, and NOT the feature itself. Because I honestly can't see why anyone would be against utility & convenience, not to mention getting more Value out of data that's ALREADY there anyway. Just to be clear, for those who misunderstood my OP, the chronological sorting I was talking about is based on our real world's publication information, NOT the in-universe appearances of the characters. So yes, the data IS already there and good to go. We're just using it to sort the "Publication" column on a simple table. And if a user so desires, they can simply re-sort the list using the "Title" column, switching the sorting back to the standard "Alphabetical". So basically, best of both worlds. Nobody loses out on anything.

As an aside, perhaps this is me being naive, I guess, but I just assumed the entire Wiki Community just shared each other's features/code (ya know,for the good of the world & all,lol). But even if not, is it such taboo to just honestly ask them for help? Or recreate the template and THEN frankly Credit them after the fact? For me, both ways are equally Honorable; there is no shame in asking for help, especially from fellow "good guys". And yes, I love the work over there, as much as I love the work over here, so I do believe they would wanna help, despite the traditional rivalry. Tease me if you want, but I was raised to cautiously assume the good in everybody, UNTIL proven otherwise.

>>...At some point in history, there was a "snap" and both wikis separated...

Hahahah! Nice one. That really got me chuckling (yes,I'm shallow like that,lawl).

>>...Just a little something I had to say kinda off topic...

Oh, not at all off-topic, good sir. At least not to me, in my Infinite Wisdom (within this thread) as its OP. But no, seriously, if anything, thanks for the old warrior's insight. Again, this perhaps betrays my naivete, but I actually feel really bad about what you just said. I don't mean to judge the parents' circumstances during that time; maybe they really DID have good reasons to... part ways.

But I still feel really bad, because you basically just revealed to me, that these two worlds, which I equally love, could've been so much more today... were it not for the Snap.

I agree that there should be chronological appearances. I request that it would go one step further by breaking down the appearances like sub-categories with (Flashback only) appearances, (Mentioned only) appearances (Phone call only) appearances etc... I would like to know how many times for example Rao was mentioned since there are no physical appearances of him. Or a particular character was (Mentioned only) in various comics.

Plus, I don't agree that (In picture only) should count as an appearance. If I am trying to get all physical appearances of a character I don't want to buy a book that just shows this character (In picture only). I would like to be able to break down the appearances.

Yeah, no. We 're not doing that.

I'll admit I'm not a big fan of the way we list appearances for things like statues, pictures, etc. It also kind of bugs me when we list one panel cameo flashbacks or groupshot flashbacks. That said, I don't want to go to the extreme that Marvel does by categorizing them all separately. That is almost impossible for non-editors to navigate.

As to the split between the Marvel and DC sites, it isn't so much a split as a separate evolution. I wasn't here in the very beginning but most of the early work was done by people who faded out as life demands changed. I know a couple of them became less involved as work and kids took more of their time. Even then, the sites were so much smaller, you could manage multiple sites. Now, the sites are much, much bigger. For me personally, I get so deep into DC that I can't devote enough time to another franchise to be really competent and still live a functional life. I suspect that's the same for most of the other prolific editors.

So it was less of a Snap, and more of a... Slide? As in, slowly slid apart.

Thanks for another veteran's insight. Fans like me, who love BOTH Universes, appreciate it more than you'll ever know. It gives us a clearer--and more nuanced--idea of these two worlds' "origins" & their evolving interaction with each other. And its ultimate outcome, for better or worse. As if moved by Fate, the two Wikis started to reflect or mimic the two Companies' relationship or... disposition? Without knowing it, or at least, without intending for it to happen that way.

As for people "fading out"--or at least being constrained, because of Real Life and Time itself, yeah, I hear ya. It's a sad Truth that, I guess, we already knew anyway. We fans immerse ourselves so much in these worlds, that has practically immortal people with time that practically doesn't move, that we sometimes forget our OWN world works in exactly the opposite way.