Template talk:InfoBoxStarSystem

Why does this have to be a new IFB? Why can't this just be a modification of Template:InfoBoxPlanet? --Scaletail 16:47, 26 March 2009 (PDT)

I've been meaning to go over the articles eventually, and do a clear differentiation between systems and planets. IMHO the articles should always be named for the system (i.e. Suk, not Suk II; Norn, not Verthandi; Carver, not Liberty). In this light, having a separate system infobox makes sense. However, "Time to Jump Point" is different for each planet in a given system so probably should to into the planet infobox instead; conversely, the number of suns might be worthwile to include as a surprising number of BT systems have more than one sun. Frabby 17:14, 26 March 2009 (PDT)
I take your point and I have no problem with naming articles after systems. Do you foresee the Carver system having an article and the planet Liberty having a separate one? I can't see that, honestly, so that's why I cannot understand needs two separate IFBs. --Scaletail 17:45, 26 March 2009 (PDT)
I envision planets to be listed within their respective system, with redirects where appropriate. For example, the article about the Algol system gets system data including data about the system's four suns (and perhaps a note that a later source, the WizKids LinkNet page, fails to mention the four suns...) and within that article, the planet of Algol (as described on LinkNet) and the planet of Kali (obviously another world, but within the same system) get their full coverage. For each planet you may want to present a Infobox:Planet with planet-specific stuff including time to jump point, but in some cases you are going to have several Planets covered within one System article. Frabby 18:14, 26 March 2009 (PDT)
I can see that. I guess Project:Planets should come up with a new standard for planet articles, which will mean changing them all. --Scaletail 18:53, 26 March 2009 (PDT)

Format suggestions[edit]

I am helpless when it comes to creating templates and infoboxes or I would do it myself. Anyways, I want to raise a few issues:

  • Recharge time might be a useful data to include in the infobox
  • Distance from Terra... isn't this a bit pointless? Also, that's fairly easy to calculate from the coords (assuming the two-dimensional map projection is canon even, which I'm unsure of).
  • Transit time to planet depends on the individual planet, and therefore does not belong to the system information.
  • Planetary information should be a totally separate infobox, to be used within the article as needed. At the same time, only very few systems have information on more than one planet that warrants an infobox. In some cases, the "inhabited world" is an asteroid, habitat or other deep-space facility and I would want the flexibility to reflect this in the text. That said, the planet infobox looks good.

Frabby 12:14, 27 March 2009 (PDT)