Jump to content

Talk:Music of the SaGa series

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMusic of the SaGa series has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 11, 2009Good article nomineeListed

Unlimited SaGa

[edit]

"Unlimited SaGa is the newest subseries of SaGa games" -> Source? I thought it was just one game. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 11:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. --PresN 14:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Music of the SaGa series/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman 07:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overall this is a very good article, I found some issues, but I went and fixed most of them. I found a couple remaining ones though:

  • Any reviews on the Prologue?
  • I think I got them all, but double check prose for things that came out in 2009; it was saying that "it will come out in september...", for example.
  • Cover art of one or two of the major albums would be nice, but at the same time I want to keep nonfree guidelines intact, so it's up to you.

Since none of my concerns are really GA issues, I'm going to pass this without a hold. Well done. Wizardman 07:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimania development information currently not in the article

[edit]

The following source should be translated and used to expand the current incomplete article:

Anyone willing to help translate even one page is welcome! Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 08:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the link. Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 19:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsed sections

[edit]
Discussion now moved to Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility#Collapsing_music_track_lists --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am starting this discussion per WP:BRD.
Uncollapse - Per MOS:CO, "Scrolling lists, and boxes that toggle text display between hide and show, should not conceal article content, including reference lists, image galleries, and image captions" and "Collapsible sections or cells may be used in tables that consolidate information covered in the main text, and in navboxes". The collapsible tables "conceal article content" and do not "consolidate information covered in the main text". The lists of songs are not navboxes. Thoughts? --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware that tracklists are not navboxes; I was going for "Collapsible sections or cells may be used in tables that consolidate information covered in the main text". the Tracklist template has had a collapsed option for as long as it's been around (5 years); if it wasn't allowed then I think it would have become an issue at some point, but I can't find any disagreements on the template talk page history or the MOS talk page history. Really, though, the biggest problem and the reason I'm willing to argue about it is that with the tracklists collapsed, this article takes 7 page-downs to cover on my (wide) monitor; with the tracklists uncollapsed, it takes 20. Almost 2/3 of this (rather list-y) article gets filled with these tables that make the article really hard to read. --PresN 20:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Should never impend "impede" reader's access to information. Why put steps between the readers and the content - that said is the info that important?-- Moxy (talk) 20:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reply
  1. The track lists are NOT "information covered in the main text"
  2. WP:OSE
  3. Some people may use "devices that do not support JavaScript or CSS" making the track lists unreadable from that piece of equipment --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:21, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. The albums are discussed in the main text, including what the tracks are, and the track lists are further details on the specifics of those tracks.
  2. OSE has nothing to do with this; when thousands of pages over 5 years have collapsed tracklists you can't just pretend they don't matter with "OSE".
  3. If the user's browser doesn't support the collapsing, it just doesn't collapse- I've tested it personally.
  4. Seriously, I've used collapsed tracklists in featured articles before- it's not like this is the only time anyone's used them on Wikipedia. This is not an obscure template- there's no way to tell how many times it's used collapsed, but overall it's on 42000 articles. None of your arguments are new, or generally supported. --PresN 02:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Songs "Knights of the Demon World Tower", "Searching for the Secret Treasure", "Through the Cramped Darkness" and "Mystery of the Secret Treasure" are only mentioned in the collapsible tables of Music of the SaGa series and nowhere else in the entire article. Lengthy discussions that include MOS:CO have taken place here and here. I am not saying that the existing collapsed lists don't matter, I am saying that the collapsing could still be a problem. How many individual browsers have you tested? --Jax 0677 (talk) 10:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Um, in the two links you provide, in the first the only mention of collapse is Gong show saying that he will address collapse concerns in another post (which he never makes), and in the second, Melodia Chaconne, Gong show, Jclemens, Michig, and Hobbes Goodyear support the idea of collapsed tracklists, and only Kaldari opposes it, so I'm not sure what you were trying to prove. As to browsers, just turn off javascript and css in your browser and you can see yourself- I've tested in Firefox and IE. The idea that screenreaders had a problem with them was explicitly removed from the MOS in 2010 as no longer being true, due to changes in the way WP handles creating collapsible content in general, not just that template. --PresN 14:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - I guess if there is support, then we should change the policy, though that may be difficult to get past MOS:ACCESS#Users_with_limited_CSS.2FJavaScript_support. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A good way to see how others have to deal with collapsed sections would be to not use a mouse. Use the Tab button to get to the "Show" tab you with to view then press enter to see it. Many readers dont use a mouse, thus not a good idea to put obstacles in the way of information. Also on a mobile version (using your phone) try and hit the small "Show" tab accurately. This a just a few reasons we should not collapse content. -- Moxy (talk) 18:57, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even know what to say to that. The "Show" button is the exact same size as any other wikilink- and larger than the wikilinks in the infobox. Saying that one text click area is too small while every other identical one on the page isn't is just... nonsense. And I'm not going to touch the idea that "many users" routinely press tab dozens of times to get to a specific link rather than click on it- all desktops and laptops have some sort of mouse device, and phones and tablets have touchpads. Expanding all of the tracklists is putting obstacles in the way of information by tripling the length of the article when first opened, and for some hypothetical user that doesn't want to use a mouse. (who isn't you, clearly, since you have a dozen collapsed templates on your user page- funny how the standard for those is also to default to collapsed.) --PresN 19:48, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If your interested in learning more about the problem over insulting people please read over What kind of problems do they encounter? -- Moxy (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If your argument now is that having anything be collapsed is a problem for people without use of both hands, then you should get the MOS changed to specify that nothing should ever be collapsed, and get the "collapsed" option removed from this and every other template that can be defaulted to collapsed. We have the MOS for a reason, and it doesn't say that right now, and collapsed templates are all over the place- again, you have a dozen on your user page alone. I'm not trying to insult you, though I'm rolling my eyes at your attempt to gain points by pretending I was, but I get really tired of people trying to enforce standards on random articles based on what they think the MOS "should" say due to a wikiproject's essay, rather than way it "does" say. WP:ACCESS has had no problems in the past with getting screenreader issues pushed through FLC and FAC, so I see no reason why a discussion about mouseless users is taking place here rather than at the MOS page where it belongs. --PresN 22:15, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - "if there is support, then we should change the policy, though that may be difficult to get past MOS:ACCESS ... ". Again, "Collapsible sections or cells may be used in tables that consolidate information covered in the main text, and in navboxes". I feel that with a name like Wikimedia Foundation, we must absolutely respect MOS:ACCESS. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:08, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about anybody else, but it has absolutely no effect on screen reader users like me. Graham87 01:20, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - Wikipedia:Accessibility dos and don'ts specifically states: "Don't use scrolling lists or collapsible sections to conceal content. However, 'Collapsible sections or cells may be used in tables that consolidate information covered in the main text, and in navboxes', as explained in the related section of the Manual of Style." --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion about collapsing music track lists

[edit]

I have started a new discussion about collapsing track lists at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility#Collapsing_music_track_lists. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Music of the SaGa series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:38, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Music_of_the_SaGa_series&oldid=1209276728"