Template talk:Xeno series
|WikiProject Video games||(Rated Template-class)|
Staff listing order
I believe that it should be of importance. I am very prolific in the history of the Xeno series outside Wikipedia and I can give you an objective overview of why importance should be before alphabetical order. In layman terms, Tetsuya Takahashi created Xenogears with Squaresoft developing. Once Xenogears failed to meet sales expectations, Takahashi left Square and continued his franchise through a new company (Monolith Soft which was funded by Namco to be a subsidiary) and a new trademark, Xenosaga. Xenosaga had a similar fate with its third installment and the mainline franchise did not receive a fourth installment because Bandai Namco were not satisfied with the sales. Nintendo wanted to make Bandai Namco a subsidiary for the company to which Bandai Namco declined, however, both companies came to a compromise by having Bandai Namco exchanging shares of its Monolith Soft subsidiary to Nintendo. Once Nintendo purchased all the shares of Monolith Soft from Bandai Namco, it became a complete subsidiary to Nintendo. After that occurred, Tetsuya Takahashi has the opportunity to continue on the Xeno franchise with another new trademark, Xenoblade Chronicles. Xenoblade Chronicles is the current iteration of the Xeno series and the most critically and commercially successful variant of the franchise to date. Tetsuya Takahashi has stated that the Xeno subtitling is so that consumers understand that they are all games directed by him! Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
- I understand his role and importance - I've written a good portion of the Xeno related content on the website. I don't think anyone doubts his importance. The bigger issue is your approach of "organizing related to importance": Its subjective - there's going to be constant arguments over this, especially second place onward. Additionally, I'm not sure the navigation template is necessarily the place to express such a concept - there's no context on them, and listing first doesn't inherently show more/less importance. Nor does it need to - most of the articles, especially the series one, explicitly state Takahshi's importance early on in the article or info box. It's better (and already) communicated in articles.
- On the other hand, something like alphabetical order is objective, and offers little room for arguments over placement once established.
- Another option would be trimming back these names. Most if the rest of these names are really synonymous with the series, except maybe Soryaga, and even she's missing from a few entries now... Sergecross73 msg me 15:21, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
I suppose you provide valid points with prioritizing alphabetical ordering. I never considered the different interpretations with the navigation box. I'm willing to accept alphabetical ordering now. But as far as the people involved goes, I think it's good enough as it is. Trim it any further and there's no purpose of the people category (which is a category that Tetsuya Takahashi has to be in). Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 15:49, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
- That's fine. It was just a possible way to end the dispute. I don't particularly think it needs to be trimmed. Sergecross73 msg me 17:56, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Late on this, but I'm only preferring alphabetical order since it objectively can't be argued against (outside of personal preference), and it's how most other similar templates are ordered. That or chronologically, which half of this already is. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:45, 6 November 2016 (UTC)