Talk:List of Divines

How to best format this page

I've been wondering if the current formatting is the most useful. The pros I see as-is are that less-important Divines can have short descriptions without requiring a page for each one, that it's easy to find the most important Divines from each season, and that spoilers are avoided. The cons are that there are repeated entries and the page takes more work to maintain / might be more confusing to navigate than a plain list. I created a simple alphabetical list which does contain some implicit spoilers (i.e. the reveal from the C/W prequel) and leaves out Divines whose canonicity is unclear (to me). (Also a list by affiliation.) Would a simple alphabetical list be better for the default page, or is it better as-is? Would it be useful to have a second page "List of Divines, alphabetical" and/or a "List of Divines by affiliation"? Does any of this even matter at all. 1smalldragon (talk) 01:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I do really like the page as it currently is, but I get what you mean about whether it's the most useful format for the default page. Personally I like the idea of the simple alphabetical list as the default page, with links to a List of Divines by season page (that this one would presumably be moved to) and/or a List of Divines by affiliation page. But none of my feelings about that are particularly strong; I'd also be fine with this remaining the default page. (Sorry if this is all unhelpful of me!) For what it's worth I think it would be really handy either way to have multiple different lists that organize things differently, because there are SO many Divines that this by-season list and the by-affiliation list you drafted can be really helpful in a way that a purely alphabetical page isn't. Rigormorphis (talk) 02:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

First of all I also like the page as is, because I think the way you sectioned it is really good. I expecially like the "Major Divines/Mentioned only/Extracanonical" bit. That's for the information part of it, though I would also agree with you that it is a bit uwieldy. If you look at my user page I've tried my hand at a table as a possible alternative (maybe it's just me but I'm always very partial to a table instead of a straight-up list!). Each of the columns are sortable alphabetically. This is somewhat of a problem for the Seasons and importance, since the alphabetical order there isn't the chronical one. (EDIT: at least for the seasons it's possible to set a different sorting key! So that works now.) There are some other annoyances too, mostly regarding Divines that appear in multiple seasons - as you can see from Asepsis in my example table it basically doubles some cells if you sort a column. All in all I'm honestly not sure if it solves much aside from the need to have 2 separate pages (since you can sort the Divines alphabetically), but I wanted to put it out there at least since I had the idea! So, thoughts? Is this anything? Rosamorph (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

There's something really satisfying about the idea of a table! It is a really good idea. It is too bad that sorting messes with the number of tabs but that's fairly minor. My only real concern is how it easy or not it would be to edit and maintain a fairly complex wikitable at that size. I think for now I am going to make the additional pages, but it might be worth doing something with the table, esp if editing three separate lists turns out to be too much work? 1smalldragon (talk)