Template talk:Building

Broken?
The category-linking section of this template does not seem to work as advertised. ~ Lhynard (talk) 16:15, January 1, 2015 (UTC)


 * Please be more specific, and/or point me to an example of misbehavior. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 21:41, January 1, 2015 (UTC)


 * Sure. Take any article using Template:Building&mdash;e.g., Conyberry Arms&mdash;it simply says "Inhabitants" in the list of links, instead of "Inhabitants of Conyberry Arms". (The field  is set to  .) I've not seen a single building page where it is working properly. ~ Lhynard (talk) 23:17, January 1, 2015 (UTC)


 * Ah, my bad. I see now that the link actually is to the correct place; it's just that&mdash; unlike most of the other infoboxes&mdash;the link text does not match the actual link. ~ Lhynard (talk) 23:21, January 1, 2015 (UTC)


 * I have updated this template to act like the Location template in regards to the categories. It now prints out the full category name and now recognizes "usethe" and "useon" parameters. It should also be backward compatible so no pages should break due to this change, but let me know if you discover something amiss. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 18:57, January 2, 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks, M! ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:37, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Non-Volo Ratings?
While I'm working through buildings to add to the wiki, I'm wondering about adding some functionality to this template for "non-Volo" ratings. The sourcebooks I have all list quality and price ratings, (with terms such as "moderate", "excellent", etc.,) but these aren't in pipes or tankards.

So then, should I make new fields for the template? Or should I guess-timate pipes/tankards and coins for these?

~ Lhynard (talk) 19:45, January 2, 2015 (UTC)

Anyone? ~ Lhynard (talk) 12:01, April 7, 2015 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. The pipes/tankards thing is a Volo signature, but I'm not sure if people care where the ratings come from. (Oh, who am I kidding? Somebody will care. :P ) Is there a one-to-one correspondence between the non-Volo ratings and the Volo symbols? Does one source use a scale of 1–5 and the other use 1–4? If they do not correspond, then I'd say we need a distinctly different way of representing the rating. If they do, then we could use the same symbols as long as we make sure not to represent them as from Volo. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 13:17, April 7, 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't think they use the same scale, unfortunately. Maybe a tab box could be used&mdash;one for Volo's ratings and the other for other ratings. I'm not sure if there are any cases where a location was reviewed in both ways or not, though. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:34, April 13, 2015 (UTC)