Template talk:Silent Hill series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.


Does there relly need to be seperate sections for the soundtracks of the games? These can be so ealisy integrated with the main articles. --Thaddius 13:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe not, but why have all the character and other media articles been removed? The template is supposed to provide easy access to all important Silent Hill articles, so people don't have to click through a bunch of other articles or do a search to get to them. True, the future works are far off, but if they actually have articles, then this should link to them so more people are aware and can improve upon them. Pomte 09:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Someone got edit happy with the template. I suspect there will be some edit wars over the template. --Thaddius 13:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


Is it worth renaming this to simply "Silent Hill" as it includes the film and could also include Silent Hill influences and trivia, Silent Hill: 0rigins, Silent Hill Experience, Silent Hill (comics) and posibly some others. I just did some work on Template:The War of the Worlds and this might also benefit from having two columns as at the moment everything seems crammed in the middle. (Emperor 23:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC))

I agree with you wholeheartedly but WT:CVG has decided this convention. –Pomte 00:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I suppose the thing is that is now dealing with games, books, films, comics, etc. and this fals outside of the remit of one single project area (I don't have much to do with CVG and am arriving from a film/novel/comics direction). For templates covering mixed media like this see e.g. Template:Alien (which I also had a hand in). Basically the current format is fine and dandy if you are just listing games in a series but once you start adding in things that aren't games it gets messy. It is already confusing with the film lumped in there with no clear differentiation and expanding this will only make matters worse. (Emperor 02:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC))
As a couple more examples have a look a the navboxes on War of the Worlds (2005 film) - the ones with the same media (like Speilberg's films) are lumped together but when you mix the media you have to start splitting things up and differentiating between them. As is also done for Template:Terminator. (Emperor 04:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC))
I've made a few quick changes, changed the title of the box from Silent Hill video games to Silent Hill franchise Silent Hill Articles & Pages (typo), although franchise sounds a bit... out of place, I don't really know but IMO it doesn't flow all too well, but the change seemed necessary since the template is inclusive of the games as well as the movie and respective list pages. Change to your liking. ≈Neur0X← 03:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


Problems while updating the template, doesn't show up normally anymore :( help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Character / Monster split[edit]

I created a fifth group for the monsters of Silent Hill, given that there are two separate articles for the characters and the monsters.


I find the text extremely difficult to read against the dark red. Is anyone else having this problem, and would it be possible to lighten it up a bit? Kaguya-chan (talk) 23:55, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I put this color in order for the navbox to match the picture that I added some minutes ago, but it was removed. Check Lenin and McCarthy's talk page and also give your opinion on the picture's resizing. Hula Hup (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


  1. The changes that Ryu "made" should be blamed on me. :)
  2. The reversion made removed the hlist formatting, which is an accessibility thing. This was largely unintentional I suspect
  3. On the media section, having those three items split up seemed like overkill to me. /shrug
  4. On companies, the majority of them do not have this template on their page, and further played relatively minor roles in development/publishing (as in, one game here, one game there). I won't revert readdition, but navboxes should generally only have links to articles which link back to the navbox; I actually added this template to one of the articles...
  5. Re italics at the top: That's just overkill. That's necessary only really for articles. Templates are backend...

Not sure if all of those were meant to be done in the revert, but I figured I'd give rationale for all of them. --Izno (talk) 08:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

1. I knew that from the beginning.
2. Yes, it was accidental.
3. Alright.
4. I understand, but is there a policy requiring that navboxes should only contain links to articles which link back or is it advice by you? Concerning "Related companies" and "Related people", I do not find them to be too much; since sub-categories help readers' navigation of the navbox, why not include them? Furthermore, the group title "Other games" is misleading, as it implies "Other games in the series". The Arcade, Orphan, and The Escape do not belong to the series. Also, the group title "Related" is, unfortunately, not making any sense (related what?).
5. Since it is a video game series' name, italics are absolutely necessary; as far as I know, there is no policy prohibiting the addition of displaytitle templates on navbox pages.
Thank you. Hula Hup (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
No, no policy that I know of, but it's kind of good practice in my mind just to make sure everything is well cross-linked. As well, some of the links aren't high value; consider that a link to the general company Konami Tokyo, while relevant, doesn't link back nor discuss in the same detail as the article on Team Silent might, with respect to Silent Hill. Is the series really that important to Konami given the number of titles they put out? Etc. There's nothing that says this is required, but it does seem good practice to me. Smaller developers that only touch one game... are they really that important to end up on the template, when it's not that important to them? Etc. I think there was some advice on WT:VG at some point about the matter, but that would require some digging. Again, I'm not going to contest readdition, but that's a slightly stronger thought-set, I suppose.
"Other games": I'm just trying to shorten up the group name primarily. Additionally, they might not be in the series proper, but they do carry the name, and why would we include them (realistically) if they didn't carry that name? /shrug
"Related" is again, another shortform. Just trying to keep the groupname small yet "related" to everything in the group's list.
There is nothing prohibited, but the point I'm making is that no-one front-viewing looks at it, and no-one should honestly care about it. (And, imo, it just looks ugly, set next to the word "template".) Formatting is hardly necessary, regardless whether that's a name or not; it's common sense in this case not to use it. /shrug
Do what you will. I'd argue a little more heavily for a series of games I better appreciated. --Izno (talk) 00:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
There's also some of this sort of stuff on Wikipedia:A navbox on every page. --Izno (talk) 00:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Book of Memories[edit]

I've moved Silent Hill: Book of Memories to Other related video games section as Book of Memories is a going to be a multiplayer game rather than a single-player game, and is also not a main installment of the Silent Hill series as I say Book of Memories is a spinoff game rather a main game to the series. TheDeviantPro (talk) 08:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Book of Memories is a Portable game, which is a main port of the installments and it's not really an Arcade or Mobile phone game that fits into the "Other related video games". Should that include Shattered Memories too even though its a console port? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
I have no idea what you are even trying to say here... Book of Memories is not a port of the main installments (neither is Shattered Memories, that's an remake). And how is the "other related video games" line inherently exclusive to Mobile and Arcade games? Or are you saying that Book of Memories should be included among the main series simply because it came out to the same category of console as ONE of the main series games? And if that is the case... what is the logic behind that? --Painocus (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Unnecessary shortening of titles[edit]

Hi @Jotamide:,

How is changing Silent Hill 2 to [[Silent Hill 2|2]] an improvement of readability? I think that goes directly against WP:ACCESS. WP:EASTEREGG says there shouldn't be "surprising" piped links; how would the general reader of Wikipedia know that Downpour is called Silent Hill: Downpour? And concerning mobile phones, a WP:NAVBOX doesn't show up there. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 21:38, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

@Jotamide:, you haven't edited since, for now I'll reinstate my revision. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:01, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
@Soetermans:, I changed it because literally every other video game template on wikipedia doesn't repeat the franchise name ad nauseam (exhibit A, B, C, D). I don't contribute as often as I used to, because WP:VG is plagued with edit wars and people undoing each other's work. So really, do whatever you want. Jotamide (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Is it really important that any user viewing the navbox should instantly be able to tell that Downpour links to a page specifically called Silent Hill: Downpour? All they really need to know at that stage is that it's a game in the Silent Hill series, and that its name is some variation on Downpour, which Downpour achieves. If they want to know the exact title, all they have to do is expend one second's worth of effort to hover over it and look at the URL. I agree that links shouldn't be shortened to a single character, though – it will be difficult to click on for some readers, which isn't worth the saved space. —Flax5 19:08, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
WP:EGG is for something else entirely, Soetermans, and does not support the edits you've been making. --Izno (talk) 11:36, 23 June 2016 (UTC)