Category talk:Islands with explorers' halls

From YPPedia


I propose to add subcats to these categories, such that we can determine at a glance which ocean has which attractions. I propose to add, e.g. Category:Cerulean islands with explorers' halls, Category:Emerald islands with explorers' halls, and Category:Meridian islands with explorers' halls (and I guess more for the defunct oceans). Then we slot the island articles into the new cats and they are automatically categorized into the parent. How does that sound? Chupchup 14:42, 5 July 2012 (PDT)

I'm okay with this. One of my goals which I never got around to was going through all of the "old" oceans and marking the attractions as dusted so that they would not show up on these lists, but I never got around to that. Seems like a project to go hand-in-hand with this one if you go through with it. --Fannon 14:45, 5 July 2012 (PDT)
Just as an FYI, and not to discourage you from this update, we already have this capability via Google. By entering the phrases "Islands with explorers' halls" and "X Ocean islands" (where "X" is the desired ocean in question), with quotes in both cases, to the search parameter "" (without quotes, for this one parameter alone) into the search box, you get a list of the relevant islands. As an example, I've got such a search linked into my pirate's page (for all Meridian islands having shacks). Again, this is just FWIW. -- Franklincain (t/c) 14:53, 5 July 2012 (PDT)
You'll need to tinker with the attraction template to work out how to do this. It won't save you from having to edit every single page, but as the different attraction categories are added via the template, that's how you'll need to adjust to account for the sub-categories. (To save you some time, the category is added via the Template:Attraction/dusted-no portion) --Fannon 14:43, 7 July 2012 (PDT)
Yeah, I noticed this after starting this discussion, and I'm a little discouraged now. I guess I would need to add another argument to the template. I am not good at template-fu. I may put this off for a while. Chupchup 17:47, 7 July 2012 (PDT)
I've been staring at it, and I can't think of a not-sucky way to do it. All of the various ways I come up with are all kind of complicated, assuming they even work, and some are especially ugly in nature. I'll continue pondering unless someone who actually knows coding well enough (Faulkston, maybe? I know you read everything) chimes in with a suggestion. --Fannon 21:46, 7 July 2012 (PDT)