Template talk:Stranger Things

Winona Ryder character
from your edit summary, "we don't put redirects in navboxes". Please cite the policy or guideline for this. Why wouldn't we want to put redirects in navboxes in some cases, like this one for a major character in an ongoing series who probably will have an article soon?  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  22:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:NAVNOREDIRECT. And also WP:NORUSH—we can certainly add a link if a character article emerges. —Joeyconnick (talk) 04:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * from WP:NAVNOREDIRECT: "It is usually preferable not to use redirected links in navigational templates"... please note the term "usually". As a template editor, one of the things I do is bypass redirects in navboxes. But sometimes I don't in accord with WP:NAVNOREDIRECT. That editing guideline does not in any way guide us to omit important redirects like the one I added. Instead, it permits it: "There are exceptions to this exception: where a redirect represents a distinct sub-topic within a larger article and is not merely a variant name, it is preferable to leave the redirect in the template." So please reinstate the link, or start an RfC on the guideline's talk page to modify those passages.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  09:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * PS. Please note that the "Episodes" link in this navbox is a redirect, and one that I would not bypass nor remove were I editing this template.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  09:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Right... but with "Episodes", there isn't going to be another potential episode article. With characters, you could conceivably have a redirect for every main cast member (or every substantial recurring, or special guest, etc) and then you have editors doing WP:OR on which are worthy of inclusion in the navbox and which aren't. Not that I'm arguing Joyce Byers is less important than Steve Harrington, but you can see how it could be argued either way. Given that, it seems most sensible, and less open to edit wars, to simply avoid including characters for which there is no separate article. Otherwise, if we include Joyce Byers, why aren't we including Will Byers, and Max, Mike, Dustin, etc etc etc? PS You don't need to ping me on every reply; I'm watching this page so I'll see changes. —Joeyconnick (talk) 20:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I see your point; it seems to boil down to deciding on this talk page what links should be a part of this template. The guideline is full of leeway for editors to, yes, disagree and maybe even edit war, although I would hope that most editors would come to this page before getting blocked or whatever. I think Ryder's character should have a link in this template. Don't care yet about the others, but Ryder is a star and a big audience and sponsor draw to that series. Her character is way beyond being just a "variant name" and is a "distinct sub-topic within a larger article". That's why I added the character, and that's why the link should be in the template (per the guideline). Also, I just checked for a draft article, and somebody's already on it.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  23:31, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Gave some more thought to the other character names you mentioned, most of which I'm unfamiliar with. This is a "navigation" template, and readers should be able to "navigate" to appropriate links, whether those links are to articles or to sections or anchors doesn't really matter. It's the readers who matter, and they should be able to find info about any main character in the series. So yes, even if that info is just a short paragraph in a section of a list, readers should be able to navigate to info about them from this navbox.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  23:48, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, a navbox is for navigation, but it's about navigating to different articles, not sections within an article to which the navbox already has a link (that's what tables of content in the articles themselves are for). And again, in the context of the actors, sure, Ryder was probably the biggest name attached when it launched but the section we are talking about is the characters, and it's arguable whether the character she plays is a more prominent one vis-a-vis the other important ones. It sounds like you want her character included because of Ryder's prominence as an actor... but that's not how we determine notability for articles about characters. It's not like Ryder's contributions to the series, or the recognition she's received from it, are hidden... she is listed in the main cast, and her nominations/accolades are all there in the series article. Again, if the draft article for her character moves to mainspace, of course we'd include it here, but until that time, your arguments, taken to their logical conclusion (include links to all prominent characters [assuming we could even agree on what constitutes prominence]), would make the navbox cluttered and actually  useful to readers. —Joeyconnick (talk) 00:08, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That seems insupportable. I've shown you in the guideline you cited that inclusion of the Joyce Byers link is permitted and encouraged. You have not been able to show me how that guideline supports keeping the link out of the template. Please explain why you are unwilling to comply with the community consensus that shaped the guideline you cited?  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  16:13, 17 August 2019 (UTC)