An option to disable this...

[DarkPiplup]

Well, I wonder why you don't put on the wiki some kind of method to disable articles related to the main games and not its remakes. I mean, I'm searching for example for Littleroot Town (Hoenn), now i see which items you can adquire. One of them is Latiasite, but oh wait, i haven't pokemon OR/AS... That's what i'm trying to mean (also, why did you changed the amulet coin icon...) That's because I don't really like remakes. Well, the FR/GL remakes were good, but up to HeartGold & SoulSilver i just... no words.
I would like an option to disable it please. I'm totally sure the are more people like me, who thinks is a good idea.

 

[Stratelier]

Most item checklists already specify which version (originals or remakes) they apply to, specifically to avoid this kind of confusion.

 

[bwburke94]

Most item checklists already specify which version (originals or remakes) they apply to, specifically to avoid this kind of confusion.

So the obvious solution is to apply this to the checklists this doesn't already apply to?

 

[Stratelier]

Basically yes, but I'm not that familiar with the list templates to know exactly how.

However, as a quick example: Kanto Route 9 - Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia

 

[SnorlaxMonster]

Most item checklists already specify which version (originals or remakes) they apply to, specifically to avoid this kind of confusion.

So the obvious solution is to apply this to the checklists this doesn't already apply to?

I don't know of any such lists that do not already do this. Do you have any examples?

 

[Stratelier]

Here's a thought: Why do item checklists put the game/version last?

 

[Force Fire]

It makes sense to put the games as the last section - is what I thought when making the item list template.

I generally prefer listing them by games first, before listing them by location - to avoid this confusion.

 

[Tiddlywinks]

It makes sense to put the games as the last section - is what I thought when making the item list template.

I generally prefer listing them by games first, before listing them by location - to avoid this confusion.

Do you mean listing the columns or the rows? As in, the games column should come first, or all the rows in one game should be grouped (as much as possible)?

I've actually been thinking that it might be good if the itemlist templates were sortable by game.

 

[Force Fire]

The rows. They should be listed by games, so all of RSE items are grouped first and then the ORAS items.

It just looks weird to see two columns of RSE then a column for ORAS then two more columns for RSE and then another for ORAS, so on so forth.

 

[Tiddlywinks]

Well, so long as the item templates stay as they are, I fully agree with that. (If they changed to, say, show versions more like encounter tables and be sortable, I'm not sure if that'd change; but it would at least be fixable.)

 

[Kogoro]

We don't believe reasonably possible to make a table that will allow such sorting. However, we can move the games further ahead & make the style match up more with the Pokémon encounter tables.

A quick example can be found [bp=User_talk:Kogoro/ItemList/Header]here[/bp].

 

[Tiddlywinks]

We don't believe reasonably possible to make a table that will allow such sorting.

I'd like to know what about it is considered so "unreasonable", if I may?

 

[Kogoro]

We don't believe reasonably possible to make a table that will allow such sorting.

I'd like to know what about it is considered so "unreasonable", if I may?

Sorting with a header that covers multiple columns doesn't work. In order to allow sorting to work properly, it would require a number of different header templates to cover all of the needed combinations of games with individual cells for each game in the header. Templates like that would only prove to cause more issues than the sorting function is worth.