Board Thread:The Panopticon/@comment-38288735-20190125173637/@comment-8.20.65.4-20190507142029

Thank you for your feedback!

I admit to being slightly unclear on your thinking behind mentioning the infobox policy. My guess is that you're suggesting that the infobox policy for the individual story pages should be extended to the Featuring sections for any tables that include them. That would work but would be very different from how the section is used now. Recurring species are pretty consistently listed in the Featuring sections on tables; the inconsistencies I mentioned in my original post were more about individual characters than species.

My goal when making my above proposal was not to rock the boat. I tried to make it reflect what is already on the actual pages as much as possible so that things wouldn't necessarily be changed so much as edited to match one another. If we ignore the "listing alphabetically" part, the vast majority of listings already conform with my proposal.

In regard to your last point, I believe we are talking about two different types of consistency. I was referring to rules consistency, and you are talking about visual consistency. I agree that visual consistency should definitely be considered, but I believe it is an entirely separate issue from rules consistency. I just was having a hard time coming up with a rules consistent way of handling your visual consistency request and am entirely open to input on how it could be done.